House of Commons Debates

VOLUME 147 ● NUMBER 204 ● 2nd SESSION ● 41st PARLIAMENT

OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD)

Thursday, April 30, 2015

Speaker: The Honourable Andrew Scheer CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) 13261

HOUSE OF COMMONS

Thursday, April 30, 2015

The House met at 10 a.m. The first report is respecting participation in the mid-year executive committee held in London, United Kingdom, April 28 to May 1. Prayers The second report is respecting participation in the 60th Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference held in Yaoundé, Camer- oon, from October 2 to10, 2014. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS *** ● (1005) [Translation] [English] COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO PETITIONS FINANCE Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of Mr. Guy Caron (Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Bas- the Government in the House of Commons, CPC): Mr. Speaker, ques, NDP) moved: pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both That the Eighth Report of the Standing Committee on Finance, presented on official languages, the government's responses to two petitions. Wednesday, December 10, 2014, be concurred in. *** He said: Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by saying that I will be sharing my time with the excellent member for Welland. INTERPARLIAMENTARY DELEGATIONS Mr. Gordon Brown (Leeds—Grenville, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I would like to talk about the prebudget consultations, since that is pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to present, in the subject of the report. I am in a good mood this morning, because both official languages, four reports of the Canadian delegation of yesterday we learned that the Rimouski Oceanic will be taking part the Canada-United States Inter-parliamentary Group. in the Memorial Cup as the champions of the Quebec major junior hockey league. This will be their fourth time participating in 20 The first report concerns the seventh annual conference of the years, which is remarkable. Southeastern United States—Canadian Provinces Alliance that was held in Raleigh, North Carolina, United States of America, May 4 to My good mood is a little tempered, however, by the content of the 6, 2014. prebudget consultations. This is in no way a criticism of the chair of the Standing Committee on Finance, the member for Edmonton— [Translation] Leduc, for he is doing an excellent job. I think all the parties in the The second concerns the 24th Annual Summit of the Pacific House and all members of the finance committee recognize what a NorthWest Economic Region held in Whistler, British Columbia, great job he is doing. Canada, from July 20 to 24, 2014. Although there are some interesting points in the prebudget The third concerns the National Conference of State Legislatures consultation report, there are also some really troubling elements. legislative summit held in Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States of We have no problem with some of the points, and we have supported America, from August 18 to 22, 2014. them. Some of them even appear in budget 2015. Others, however, do pose a problem. [English] Until January, I was a member of the Standing Committee on The fourth report concerns the Canadian/American Border Trade Finance and had been for three years. Usually, the recommendations Alliance conference that was held in Washington, D.C., United were a fairly accurate—though not perfect, by any means— States, September 28 to 30, 2014. reflection of the testimony we heard. However, the recommendations Mr. Joe Preston (Elgin—Middlesex—London, CPC): Mr. in this report, which was tabled in December 2014, make it more of a Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to pre-election document for the existing government. Most if not all of present, in both official languages, two reports of the Canadian the recommendations are from the Conservative side. Not a single delegation of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. NDP or Liberal amendment was accepted. 13262 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Routine Proceedings Annual prebudget consultations are an opportunity to hear from have made it impossible for many Canadians to get employment witnesses from many parts of Canadian society. Whether they are insurance even though they contributed to it. Today, less than 38% of from the business sector, unions or civil society, their concerns Canadians who contribute to employment insurance, who make their deserve to be heard and properly reflected in the prebudget contributions expecting that employment insurance will help them, consultation report. can get it when they lose their job. This does not make sense and, at the end of the day, it is very detrimental to regions like mine, like the In this case, there are a number of problematic elements. Several Lower St. Lawrence, eastern Quebec, and eastern Canada. The recommendations in the report are nothing more than lip service. For economy in these regions has historically depended on seasonal example, recommendation 23 says that the federal government employment, to a great extent, and still does. I am proud of the should consider new ways to increase support for the Canadian efforts my riding and my region have made over the past few years aerospace industry, but does not say how. This recommendation is to diversify their economy and ensure that they are not as reliant on akin to many of the other 47 recommendations in this report in that it seasonal employment as they have been in the past. When we talk says where the government wants to go but not how to get there. about seasonal jobs, we are talking mostly about jobs in the primary That is a problem because other recommendations are more than sector, the resource sector, the forestry or the fishery. We are also just wishful thinking. They are blatantly a rationale for Conservative talking about jobs in the service sector, which for obvious reasons policies. In any case, the committee itself was not even able to are only seasonal jobs, in the tourism industry for example. Going unanimously agree on those recommendations. back to natural resources, there are also core industries such as agriculture. A farmer cannot harvest in winter. Maple syrup When the government proposes to continue reducing tariffs, for producers cannot do much of their work in the fall or winter either. example, it fails to mention that, overall, tariffs have gone up because it eliminated the general preferential tariff. The government has failed to acknowledge this reality that affects Prebudget consultations should be an exercise that reflects what several regions. We spoke out against this when the reform was was heard in committee, but in this case what we got seemed more introduced. Year after year, many witnesses have told us that the like the Conservative government's shopping list to prepare for the system is no longer adequate today. The EI fund has a surplus next election. We think that is unfortunate because the Standing because of the increase in premiums imposed by the Conservatives. Committee on Finance should be the place where we can thoroughly The government no longer knows what to do with it. One of the examine all the policies that were adopted by the government. That recommendations we received was to increase access to the program. also includes Conservative members. The Conservatives completely ignored the recommendations. Instead they took part of the surplus and decided to give it to small and A committee meeting is the only place where we can call medium-sized businesses. That measure was passed last year. Small members by name. The reason for that is that, in committee, they are and medium-sized businesses were handed over $550 million of the not government members and they do not represent their riding. employment insurance surplus with the hope of creating jobs. They are there to use their expertise to advise the government on However, the House will remember that the Parliamentary Budget what direction it should take. That is not what happened in the Officer's report stated that it would take over half a billion dollars to prebudget consultations. This time, the consultations were much create 800 jobs, contrary to what the government was saying. Today, more negative than previous consultations and reports. we find ourselves in a situation where the surplus in the EI fund, which we would like to be independent, has in large part funded the ● (1010) balanced budget that the federal government is boasting about. We submitted a minority report, which is a supplementary rather than dissenting report. It is supplementary to the 47 recommendations The prebudget consultation report contains several interesting presented by the government. There was consensus on some of those items. The work of the committee chair, the member from Edmonton recommendations, but the two opposition parties voted against —Leduc was impeccable. However, I would like to submit to the others. House the problems that exist in terms of the philosophy of One problematic issue that the government refused to address, implementing the prebudget consultations. The government is even though it was mentioned a number of times during the moving steadily away from taking the consultations into account consultations, is employment insurance. The report was tabled in and that remains a serious concern for us. December 2014, but at that time, we were already worried about the government using the employment insurance fund to balance its On that note, I will turn the floor over to the member for Welland, budget since we have seen that happen before. That concern is who is certainly going to continue in the same vein. included in the NDP's supplementary report. We had no idea what the budget was going to look like, but we were worried about that ● (1015) happening because of what we had been hearing. This is what we [English] wrote in our supplementary report: The Conservatives are banking on surpluses in the EI Account in order to fund Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, their return to budget balance—at the same time that they continue to restrict access through the implementation of their regressive EI reforms. there is a great deal of concern with regard to the budget and the manner in which the Minister of Finance has presented what I would By “regressive reforms” we specifically mean all the measures suggest is a bogus balanced budget, not to mention its unfairness to that were adopted during the major reform of 2012. These measures the middle class on taxation policy. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13263

Routine Proceedings This is a budget that does nothing for real tangible economic I am wondering if my hon. colleague can comment on whether or growth for Canada. The government does not seem to get it. It does not he feels that this budget has done an adequate job in addressing not understand that it is the middle class of Canada that will be the those major pivotal concerns of affordable housing, good jobs and driving force of our economy. Giving strength to our middle class protecting the environment. will give strength to the Canadian economy. That should be the priority. Obviously, the minister was not listening when he [Translation] canvassed and solicited opinions on the budget. Mr. Guy Caron: Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from The question I have for the member is on the general behaviour of Vancouver Kingsway for that very important question. the Minister of Finance. For example, ever since the budget presentation, he has not stood in his place to answer any questions related to the budget. I am wondering if the member might want to Affordable housing is definitely one of the biggest losers in this comment on the facade of having budget consultations and then not budget. Many organizations have condemned the lack of adequate even having the courage to answer questions on the budget after he funding. None of the recommendations coming out of the pre-budget has delivered it. consultations really address this issue in any meaningful way, despite the fact that we heard witnesses talk about the importance of ● (1020) investing in housing and express disappointment in the federal [Translation] government's lack of interest in this issue. Mr. Guy Caron: Mr. Speaker, I will start by answering the question about the balanced budget. Also, in our supplementary report, we specifically talked about how the government should take immediate action to address the Indeed, a large part of the balanced budget this government brags affordable housing crisis facing Canadian municipalities by renew- about so much comes from sources that were not recommended in ing social housing agreements and working to develop and pre-budget consultations. implement a national housing strategy as proposed by Bill C-400. The first source is the EI surplus, which was about $1.8 billion. Since the surplus announced by the government is just $1.4 billion, it Unfortunately, the government did not pay attention to that had to take the $1.8 billion from the EI surplus and add it to the recommendation, which is a real shame because the affordable consolidated revenue fund, even though the Finance Minister's housing crisis is affecting the whole country and is not getting any predecessor, Jim Flaherty, had said that the government would never real attention from the federal government. use the EI surplus to finance a balanced budget. ● (1025) The second source is the contingency fund—not just this year's fund, which went from $3 billion to $1 billion, but the fund for the [English] next two years as well. This measure was not recommended in the pre-budget consultations either. No one made that suggestion. Mr. Malcolm Allen (Welland, NDP): Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to join this debate. I want to thank my good friend, as well The third source is the early sale of GM shares, worth $3.1 billion. as the other members of the committee, for all of their hard work. As You have to add the $2 billion to this $3.1 billion. I said “early sale” he said earlier, I would thank the chair, the member for Edmonton— because the government lost a lot of money on these GM shares. If it Leduc. I have worked with him in the past, and I have always found had waited just one more week to sell them, it would have made him to be an honourable gentleman who embodies the sense of $100 million more. trying to work in a non-partisan way, especially at the committee At the end of the day, we are talking about nearly $7 billion taken level. I appreciate all of his hard work. from these three sources to achieve this balanced budget. I want to thank the members of our party, the New Democrats, [English] who worked on that committee. These documents are not props, Mr. Don Davies (Vancouver Kingsway, NDP): Mr. Speaker, the because they are documents that have been tabled and we can people of Vancouver Kingsway have been very clear for a number of actually use them. This is the kind of work that goes into the years about the kinds of issues they believe are important and which prebudget consultations by a committee of parliamentarians. They they really would like the federal government to address. go out and talk to people across the country, and people from all walks of life from across the country come to speak to them. There is a crushing, critical shortage of affordable housing in Vancouver. People are extremely concerned about the lack of good quality, full-time jobs, the kind of jobs on which people can raise a It is not just the financiers that folks talk to. Our members are family. absolutely passionate about making sure that folks from every walk of live have input, because that is what this place is about. This is People are very concerned about the environment in Vancouver their place. It is their House. It belongs to the common folk of the Kingsway. They are worried about climate change and protecting country, hence its name, the House of Commons. The greens out at Canada's pristine environment. They want to make sure our children the front are called “the commons”. They are the common place for and our children's children can enjoy that. all of us to come. That is what this document is meant to do. 13264 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Routine Proceedings It is unfortunate that when the people speak through their elected Clearly, the government failed on this particular attribute, and it representatives the government does not hear them. It seems to turn a failed the youth of this country. We all recognize that this country deaf ear to the folks who come forward and say, “Here are the things has high youth unemployment. It is apparent here in the province of that we would like to see for us”. The “us” is not the members who Ontario. It is apparent in the province of Quebec, and across this are sitting in the House, but the folks across the country that we entire country. represent who are saying what things they would like to see, the things that they want us to work on, the things that they think would ● (1030) help them. What did we find? We found that basically most folks were ignored. One thing we talk about in this place is the human capital, the I found it fascinating. I looked at the supplementary report that human potential of this great country, which is embodied in its was submitted by my good colleagues. One of the pieces was on youth. We continue to say that we need to ensure we have those folks employment insurance and what that should mean to those who are in the future who will look after us, because we all get older. The one unemployed. Mr. Speaker, I know that your riding is in southwestern thing I can say about today is I am a day older than I was yesterday, Ontario and, like mine, has come through a huge restructuring in the but I am a day younger than I will be tomorrow. The bottom line is manufacturing sector. Literally tens of thousands of folks are that we will all get older and at some point in time we may need unemployed and have gone on employment insurance. those young folks to look after us. Some of us are older than others. I When I first came to this place, I heard the government talk about will not point any fingers. I could point a finger at myself, I suppose, what the previous Liberal government had done in raiding the EI because I am older than some, but I am also younger than others. fund. What it said, and I absolutely agreed with it and almost applauded it one day, was that it would never do what the Liberal The bottom line is that if we do not invest in that human capacity, government had done previously and raid the fund. What did it do to that human potential, all those young folks, when will they have the balance the budget? It raided the fund. When we have the highest opportunity and when will they finally join in the capacity to make youth unemployment that the country has seen in decades, instead of sure that when we need them, they will be there? The government making sure that there is money for training, retraining, and job has lost an opportunity. opportunities for young people and those who do not have work, the government took about $2.1 billion out of the fund and decided to balance the books. New Democrats, on the other hand, would not have lost that Why did the Conservatives want to do that? It is an election year. opportunity. We would have made sure that opportunity was taken. They promised that they would balance the books, but they did not We would make sure that young folks actually have an opportunity promise to balance the books on the backs of the unemployed in this to go forward. If youth do not have the opportunity, then they are country. That is not what they said they would do. They said that stymied, and we put them in a place where they lose hope. If they they were good, prudent, fiscal managers and they could manage to lose hope, there is no sense in going forward, so what would be the do it without doing what the Liberal government had done years ago. point? The very things we want to remove in the sense of Well, they failed. They failed on that score. They put the test in front impediments, we did not do, which is really unfortunate in this case. of themselves and they failed. There are teachers in this place. I would suggest that when they That takes me to infrastructure. One thing that has to be built is give the Conservatives a report card, they give them an F, because capacity, because we need capacity for the economy. I am not an that is exactly what they deserve. economist, but I am a Scotsman, so I can count. God knows, I count pennies. The bottom line is that if we are going to have an economy On the other hand, what we had said was that the employment that functions, we have to be able to move throughout the economy. insurance fund belongs to those who are unemployed. It belongs to We have to be able to move physically as well. It is not all just all of those who contribute, because it is indeed an insurance fund. I electronic stuff. It is not a question of going on the Internet, pressing have said this many times before. If we buy insurance for our car and a button and shooting it through the air, through the wireless have an accident, the insurance should cover the car. Therefore, I spectrum. The bottom line is that goods and services and people have no idea why it is that the government seems to think that we have to move. In order to move them, there has to be infrastructure. should enrol in the employment insurance fund and pay the If there is no infrastructure, they are not going to move. insurance, but people should not be able to collect it if they become unemployed. The investment in infrastructure that this budget proposes is There is one thing that is absolutely crystal clear, and the law has lacklustre at best, and it is also down the road. I hate to tell the been this way since the mid-1990s. The rules changed and people Conservatives about that road, but that road has a pothole in it. In cannot quit their job and get employment insurance. People must be fact, it has more than one pothole. It is going to be pretty tough unemployed and they must have been laid off by the employer, getting down that road to get to where we want to go if we do not fix which means that the employer put them out of work and that they the potholes. I will not say everyone knows this, because the did not leave voluntarily. There have been some minor tweaks to the Conservatives decided to remove the long form census, so they do rules, such as if there was harassment or some other things that gave not really know what they need because if they do not have just cause, or some other things can happen. information, they cannot make firm decisions. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13265

Routine Proceedings That reminds me of my days when I was a municipal councillor. I Boivin Borg Brahmi Caron know a number of us in the House at one point had that career Cash Charlton previous to this one. That information was of absolute value to Chicoine Chisholm Choquette Christopherson municipal politicians in deciding whether to build a home for the Cleary Crowder aged or an arena for young kids. Without the data regarding the Davies (Vancouver Kingsway) Day demographics and where things are headed, it is hard to know which Dionne Labelle Doré Lefebvre Dubé Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona) one to build. What should we do? Should we flip a coin, hope for the Dusseault Freeman best and spend hundreds of millions of dollars in infrastructure that Garrison Genest-Jourdain Gravelle Groguhé sits vacant because the group we built it for no longer exists? It Harris (Scarborough Southwest) Harris (St. John's East) makes no sense. Hughes Julian Kellway Lapointe We need information. We need hard facts to make decisions on Latendresse Laverdière LeBlanc (LaSalle—Émard) Liu what is going to be done. If we have those hard facts and data, we Mai Marston can build the infrastructure in the appropriate places at the Masse Mathyssen May Michaud appropriate time to make sure we are getting what colloquially is Morin (Chicoutimi—Le Fjord) Morin (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine) called a good bang for the buck, which the Conservatives always Morin (Laurentides—Labelle) Morin (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot) say. However, I would refer them to the Auditor General's report of Nantel Nash Nicholls Nunez-Melo yesterday, which really was quite shameful in the sense that the Papillon Patry Auditor General said that when it came to antimicrobials, it took 18 Péclet Pilon Plamondon Rafferty years for them to do something, and they still have not done Rankin Ravignat anything, which I find surprising. Raynault Rousseau Sandhu Scott It is unfortunate the Conservatives did not listen to the folks who Sellah Sims (Newton—North Delta) Sitsabaiesan Stoffer came before committee, but that is par for the course, because they Sullivan Toone do not like listening to us either. Time and time again there has been Tremblay–— 75 time allocation in this place. Over and over there has been time NAYS allocation. Members Mr. Speaker, I move: Ablonczy Adler That the House do now adjourn. Aglukkaq Albas (1035) Albrecht Alexander ● Allen (Tobique—Mactaquac) Allison The Deputy Speaker: The question is on the motion. Is it the Ambler Ambrose Anders Anderson pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Armstrong Aspin Barlow Bateman Some hon. members: Agreed. Bélanger Bennett Benoit Bergen Some hon. members: No. Bezan Blaney Block Boughen Braid Breitkreuz The Deputy Speaker: All those in favour of the motion will Brison Brown (Leeds—Grenville) please say yea. Brown (Newmarket—Aurora) Butt Byrne Calandra Some hon. members: Yea. Calkins Cannan Carmichael Carrie Casey Chisu The Deputy Speaker: All those opposed will please say nay. Chong Clarke Clement Cotler Some hon. members: Nay. Crockatt Cuzner Daniel Dechert The Deputy Speaker: In my opinion the nays have it. Devolin Dion Dreeshen Dubourg Duncan (Vancouver Island North) Easter And five or more members having risen: Eglinski Falk Fantino Fast The Deputy Speaker: Call in the members. Findlay (Delta—Richmond East) Finley (Haldimand—Norfolk) (1110) Fletcher Fry ● Galipeau Gallant Garneau Gill (The House divided on the motion, which was negatived on the Glover Goguen following division:) Goldring Goodale Gosal Gourde (Division No. 386) Harper Harris (Cariboo—Prince George) Hawn Hayes Hillyer Hoback YEAS Holder James Members Kamp (Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission) Keddy (South Shore—St. Margaret's) Kenney (Calgary Southeast) Kent Allen (Welland) Angus Kerr Komarnicki Ashton Atamanenko Kramp (Prince Edward—Hastings) Lake Ayala Bevington Lamoureux Lauzon Blanchette Blanchette-Lamothe Leef Lemieux 13266 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Routine Proceedings Leung Lizon (Division No. 387) Lobb Lukiwski Lunney MacAulay MacKay (Central Nova) MacKenzie YEAS Maguire McCallum Members McColeman McGuinty McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood) McLeod Ablonczy Adler Menegakis Miller Aglukkaq Albas Moore (Fundy Royal) Murray Albrecht Alexander Nicholson Norlock Allen (Tobique—Mactaquac) Allison Obhrai Oliver Ambler Ambrose O'Neill Gordon Opitz Anders Anderson O'Toole Paradis Armstrong Aspin Payne Perkins Barlow Bateman Poilievre Preston Benoit Bergen Raitt Rathgeber Bezan Block Regan Reid Boughen Braid Rempel Richards Breitkreuz Brown (Leeds—Grenville) Rickford Ritz Brown (Newmarket—Aurora) Butt Scarpaleggia Schellenberger Calandra Calkins Seeback Sgro Cannan Carmichael Shea Shipley Carrie Chisu Shory Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Wind- Chong Clarke sor) Clement Crockatt Sopuck Sorenson Daniel Dechert Stanton Strahl Devolin Dreeshen Sweet Tilson Duncan (Vancouver Island North) Dykstra Toet Trost Eglinski Falk Trottier Trudeau Fantino Fast Truppe Uppal Findlay (Delta—Richmond East) Finley (Haldimand—Norfolk) Van Loan Warawa Fletcher Galipeau Warkentin Watson Gallant Gill Weston (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country) Glover Goguen Weston (Saint John) Goldring Gosal Williamson Wong Gourde Harris (Cariboo—Prince George) Woodworth Yelich Hawn Hayes Young (Oakville) Young (Vancouver South) Hillyer Hoback Yurdiga–— 161 Holder James Kamp (Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission) Keddy (South Shore—St. Margaret's) PAIRED Kenney (Calgary Southeast) Kent Nil Kerr Komarnicki Kramp (Prince Edward—Hastings) Lake The Deputy Speaker: I declare the motion defeated. Lauzon Leef Lemieux Leung ● (1115) Lizon Lobb Lukiwski Lunney Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of MacKay (Central Nova) MacKenzie the Government in the House of Commons, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I Maguire Mayes McColeman McLeod move: Menegakis Miller That the debate be now adjourned. Moore (Fundy Royal) Nicholson Norlock Obhrai The Deputy Speaker: The question is on the motion. Is it the Oliver O'Neill Gordon Opitz O'Toole pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Paradis Payne Perkins Poilievre Some hon. members: Agreed. Preston Raitt Reid Rempel Some hon. members: No. Richards Rickford Ritz Saxton The Deputy Speaker: All those in favour of the motion will Schellenberger Seeback Shea Shipley please say yea. Shory Sopuck Sorenson Stanton Some hon. members: Yea. Strahl Sweet Tilson Toet The Deputy Speaker: All those opposed will please say nay. Trost Trottier Truppe Uppal Van Kesteren Van Loan Some hon. members: Nay. Warawa Warkentin Watson Weston (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to The Deputy Speaker: In my opinion the yeas have it. Sky Country) Weston (Saint John) Williamson And five or more members having risen: Wong Woodworth Yelich Young (Oakville) The Deputy Speaker: Call in the members. Young (Vancouver South) Yurdiga Zimmer–— 139 ● (1150) NAYS [Translation] Members

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the Allen (Welland) Angus following division:) Atamanenko Ayala April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13267

Routine Proceedings Bélanger Benskin [Translation] Bevington Blanchette Blanchette-Lamothe Boivin The Deputy Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the Borg Brahmi motion? Brison Byrne Caron Casey Cash Charlton Some hon. members: Agreed. Chicoine Chisholm Choquette Christopherson Some hon. members: No. Cleary Côté Cotler Crowder The Deputy Speaker: All those in favour of the motion will Cullen Cuzner please say yea. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway) Day Dewar Dion Some hon. members: Yea. Dionne Labelle Doré Lefebvre Dubé Dubourg Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona) Dusseault The Deputy Speaker: All those opposed will please say nay. Easter Fortin Freeman Fry Some hon. members: Nay. Garneau Garrison Genest-Jourdain Goodale The Deputy Speaker: In my opinion the nays have it. Groguhé Harris (Scarborough Southwest) Harris (St. John's East) Hughes And five or more members having risen: Julian Kellway Lamoureux Lapointe The Deputy Speaker: Call in the members. Latendresse Laverdière LeBlanc (LaSalle—Émard) Liu ● (1235) MacAulay Mai Marston Masse [English] Mathyssen May McCallum McGuinty (The House divided on the motion, which was negatived on the McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood) Michaud following division: Morin (Chicoutimi—Le Fjord) Morin (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine) Morin (Laurentides—Labelle) Morin (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot) (Division No. 388) Murray Nantel Nash Nunez-Melo YEAS Papillon Patry Péclet Pilon Members Rafferty Rankin Rathgeber Ravignat Allen (Welland) Angus Raynault Regan Ashton Atamanenko Ayala Benskin Rousseau Sandhu Bevington Blanchette Scarpaleggia Scott Blanchette-Lamothe Boivin Sellah Sgro Borg Brahmi Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor) Caron Cash Sims (Newton—North Delta) Chicoine Chisholm Sitsabaiesan Stewart Choquette Christopherson Stoffer Sullivan Cleary Côté Toone Tremblay Crowder Cullen Trudeau–— 101 Davies (Vancouver Kingsway) Day Dionne Labelle Donnelly PAIRED Doré Lefebvre Dubé Nil Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona) Dusseault Freeman Garrison The Deputy Speaker: I declare the motion carried. Genest-Jourdain Groguhé Harris (Scarborough Southwest) Harris (St. John's East) Hughes Julian Kellway Lapointe *** Latendresse Laverdière LeBlanc (LaSalle—Émard) Liu ● (1155) Mai Marston Masse Mathyssen [English] May Michaud Morin (Chicoutimi—Le Fjord) Morin (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine) PETITIONS Morin (Laurentides—Labelle) Morin (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot) Nash Nunez-Melo DEMENTIA Papillon Patry Péclet Pilon Mr. Peter Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster, NDP): Mr. Quach Rafferty Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition today from several dozen Rankin Ravignat Raynault Rousseau residents of Burnaby and Richmond, British Columbia. They call Sandhu Scott upon the Minister of Health and the House of Commons to pass Bill Sellah Sims (Newton—North Delta) Sitsabaiesan Stewart C-356, An Act respecting a National Strategy for Dementia, which Sullivan Toone was introduced by the member of Parliament for Nickel Belt. Tremblay–— 75 While I am on my feet, I move, seconded by the member for NAYS Compton—Stanstead: Members That the House do now adjourn. Adler Aglukkaq 13268 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Government Orders Albas Albrecht The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin): I declare the motion Alexander Allen (Tobique—Mactaquac) Allison Ambler defeated. Ambrose Anders Anderson Armstrong The time for petitions having expired, questions on the order Aspin Barlow paper, the hon. parliamentary secretary. Bateman Bélanger Bennett Benoit Bergen Bezan *** Block Boughen Braid Breitkreuz QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER Brison Brown (Leeds—Grenville) Brown (Newmarket—Aurora) Butt Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of Calandra Calkins the Government in the House of Commons, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I Cannan Carmichael Carrie Casey ask that all questions be allowed to stand. Chisu Chong Clarke Clement The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin): Is it agreed? Cotler Crockatt Cuzner Daniel Some hon. members: Agreed. Dechert Dion Dreeshen Dubourg Duncan (Vancouver Island North) Dykstra Easter Eglinski Falk Fantino GOVERNMENT ORDERS Fast Findlay (Delta—Richmond East) Finley (Haldimand—Norfolk) Fletcher [English] Fry Galipeau Gallant Garneau Gill Glover ANTI-TERRORISM ACT, 2015 Goguen Goldring BILL C-51—TIME ALLOCATION MOTION Goodale Gosal Gourde Harris (Cariboo—Prince George) Hawn Hayes Hon. Peter Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House Hillyer Hoback of Commons, CPC) moved: Holder James Kamp (Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission) Keddy (South Shore—St. Margaret's) That, in relation to Bill C-51, An Act to enact the Security of Canada Information Kenney (Calgary Southeast) Kent Sharing Act and the Secure Air Travel Act, to amend the Criminal Code, the Kerr Komarnicki Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act and the Immigration and Refugee Kramp (Prince Edward—Hastings) Lake Protection Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts, not Lamoureux Lauzon more than one further sitting day shall be allotted to the consideration of the report Leef Lemieux stage and one sitting day shall be allotted to the third reading stage of the said bill; Leung Lizon Lobb Lukiwski and MacAulay MacKay (Central Nova) That, fifteen minutes before the expiry of the time provided for government MacKenzie Maguire business on the day allotted for the consideration of the report stage and on the day Mayes McCallum allotted to the third reading stage of the said bill, any proceedings before the House McColeman McGuinty shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and in turn every McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood) McLeod Menegakis Miller question necessary for the disposal of the stage of the bill then under consideration Moore (Fundy Royal) Murray shall be put forthwith and successively without further debate or amendment. Nicholson Norlock Obhrai Oliver The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin): Pursuant to Standing O'Neill Gordon Opitz Order 67.1, there will now be a 30-minute question period. At this O'Toole Paradis Payne Perkins point I invite hon. members who wish to ask questions to rise, so the Poilievre Preston Chair has some sense of how many questions will be asked. Raitt Regan Reid Rempel There seems to be significant interest. Consequently I ask Richards Rickford Ritz Saxton members to keep their questions to about one minute and whoever Scarpaleggia Schellenberger is responding for the government to do likewise. Seeback Sgro Shea Shipley Shory Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Wind- Questions and comments, the hon. member for Esquimalt—Juan sor) de Fuca. Sopuck Sorenson Stanton Strahl Mr. Randall Garrison (Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, NDP): Sweet Tilson Really, Mr. Speaker, shame is the only word that comes to mind. Toet Trost Trottier Trudeau This is the 94th time the government has used what it likes to call Truppe Uppal scheduling, but what is really closure, on important bills before this Van Kesteren Van Loan House of Commons. Warawa Warkentin Watson Weston (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country) When it comes to debating Bill C-51, the Minister of Public Weston (Saint John) Williamson Safety and Emergency Preparedness stood in this House and said Wong Woodworth Yelich Young (Oakville) that the proper place to have a full debate—as he moved closure at Young (Vancouver South) Yurdiga second reading—was committee. Then when we went to committee, Zimmer–— 159 we had a severely restricted number of sessions that were allocated PAIRED to hear witnesses. Not only has the government proven unwilling to Nil hear from people, but it has proven incapable of listening on the bill. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13269

Government Orders We had a statement, which I just want to ask whether the approach used by the government that he complains of is the fact that Conservatives have really fully considered. That statement said: we actually have more time for debate in this Parliament than the Protecting human rights and protecting public safety are complementary parallel time the British Parliament has had for debate on bills, a objectives, but experience has shown that serious human rights abuses can occur in parliament that is often held out as a model example. In fact, on the name of maintaining national security. average, at every stage we have exceeded by far the amount of Who said that? Who signed that statement? It was Jean Chrétien, debate that the U.K. Parliament has on relative bills. Paul Martin, Joe Clark, John Turner, five former Supreme Court justices, three past members of CIRC, and two former privacy I think we should be very pleased that we have in this House a commissioners. robust democracy, robust debate, ample opportunities for views to be heard, and in fact the record shows, more so than even in the United How are we to deal with the serious concerns expressed across the Kingdom. country? Of all the amendments that were presented at committee, the government rejected all of the opposition amendments. Mrs. Carol Hughes (Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, Clearly, the Conservatives are illustrating, once again, no NDP): Mr. Speaker, this is just unbelievable. We have seen a willingness to listen and no ability to hear Canadians' objections to coalition between the Liberals and the Conservatives on Bill C-51, this very dangerous bill. and that is quite problematic. Hon. Peter Van Loan: Mr. Speaker, I find it deeply ironic that members of the party that has twice moved to shut down the House The government and, from what we can see, the Liberals are this day—because they do not want to work anymore, do not want to saying that Canadians should have to choose between whether they have any more debate today, want the place shut down, and have want their security or their rights. It should not be one or the other. moved it twice—are now complaining there is not enough opportunity for debate. There is a little bit of irony in such an The government says that it is tough on crime, but it is cutting approach, in such a question. funding in areas where it should be investing. Instead of promoting discrimination, communities need more help to counter radicaliza- Then with regard to the question he asked and the individuals he tion in Canada. Where is the counter-radicalization strategy to work listed who were complaining that there is insufficient political with Canadian communities? Why is the government taking the oversight of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, he listed a rights away from Canadians? series of prime ministers who said that should be there, a series of prime ministers who never took that step themselves when in office and, in fact, actively resisted it themselves. That, too, is also the The Conservatives do not know what they are doing and, height of irony. obviously, the Liberals are supporting their position. That is shameful. ● (1240) Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, Hon. Peter Van Loan: Mr. Speaker, on the question of once again what we are really debating is the issue of time allocation, radicalization, the government has a number of programs under and on the issue of time allocation, let us be very clear that this way, and the RCMP is also engaged in community engagement that Reform/Conservative government, since it acquired its majority, has works toward countering radicalization. demonstrated a genuine lack of respect for proper procedures in the House of Commons. I want to pay tribute. The scourge that we have been battling most Whether it is through closure or time allocation, which are the of all, the rising tide, is Islamist extremism and jihadism, and it is the same thing, or the way the government brings in legislation as a Islamic community in Canada that has been the principal source of whole—multi-hundred-page documents for budget bills, and minis- intelligence and assistance in helping to counter occasions of ters of finance who feel they have no obligation whatsoever to stand radicalization. It is working hand in hand with the public security up and answer questions after tabling a budget—the government has agencies, with the Government of Canada, and with law enforcement a genuine lack of respect for proper parliamentary procedures inside to protect against those isolated elements in the community that the House of Commons. move in that direction. My question for the government House leader is this. Why, since the Conservatives have achieved this majority government, have we What that community and law enforcement have told us, is that seen the Prime Minister and his ministers, and particularly the they need additional tools. That is why this legislation proposes, for government House leader, demonstrate so much disrespect for example, the ability to remove from the Internet, on a judge's proper procedures here in the House of Commons? warrant, information or propaganda that is aimed at the radicalization of young people, encouraging them to commit terrorist acts. In fact, Hon. Peter Van Loan: Mr. Speaker, I do want to thank the hon. it would make, for the first time, the advocacy of a terrorist act a member and his party for their support of this legislation. It is very crime. This is long overdue. The advocacy of terrorism has to be a important in the national interest to protect the security of Canadians. crime. We appreciate that support a great deal and we thank them for it. In terms of debate in this House and the use of time allocation to If we are going to do something to combat radicalization in a schedule debates with certainty, part of the side effect of the meaningful way, that is a key element to doing so. 13270 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Government Orders Mr. Marc Garneau (Westmount—Ville-Marie, Lib.): Mr. example, approval for advanced inspections for border clearance for Speaker, I have to correct the government House leader who said trucks, similar to what we have, for instance, for air passengers right that none of the past prime ministers had done anything about now. These are things that help facilitate movement and the oversight. I would like to point out for him that in 2005, when Paul economy, but, at the same time, provide greater assurances of Martin was the prime minister, we had in place something to ensure national security. It is those kinds of win-win opportunities for which oversight. In fact, at the time, the current justice minister, who was we have been looking. then in the opposition, was on side with it, and so was the NDP. Unfortunately, it never came to pass, because the NDP provoked an election. However, the point is that we very clearly pushed for I thank the hon. member for Essex, who is very sensitive to these oversight 10 years ago. issues and has been a very strong advocate for them, particularly for the manufacturing industry in Canada, as it is so dependent on those ● (1245) linkages. Hon. Peter Van Loan: Mr. Speaker, this brings to mind the national child care plan that the Liberal Party promised some four times and just could not get done. It brings to mind its policy on Ms. Linda Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona, NDP): Mr. greenhouse gases, when it committed Canada to reducing them, yet Speaker, this debate is about the decision of the government to increased them by over 30%. It just could not get it done. reduce the debate on this important bill. I listened to the House leader talk about the great consultation that the government Once again, on this, the Liberals fought it for over two decades. conducted with Canadians. They just could not get it done. They finally changed their mind on an 11th hour deathbed repentance, facing the loss of government. The fact is that they just were not serious about it, and there is good reason for it. I took the time to meet with members of one of the mosques in my riding last week and asked them if they had been approached by or We have robust oversight in the form of the Security Intelligence met with any of the Conservative members to discuss their concerns Review Committee. In terms of the additional powers in this bill, we with Bill C-51, and they said not once. The members had actually have more significant oversight. That is before the oversight of done a survey in their mosque on the deep concerns about the judges with regard to the extended powers that the bill contemplates ramifications of this bill. They are also concerned that no one has for the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, which are the reached out to them to work with their members to try to prevent disruption powers. Those would only be exercised with the approval anybody from being lured by terrorists. of a judge in advance under a warrant. That is real, valuable oversight and the protection of our rights. Mr. Jeff Watson (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of I take severe objection to the suggestion that there has been Transport, CPC): Mr. Speaker, a critical economic infrastructure adequate consultation with Canadians about this bill and that the bill exists between the cities of Windsor and Detroit in the form of both a would not impact the rights and opportunities of Canadians. There rail tunnel and the Ambassador Bridge. The government is intent on are many in my riding who are deeply afraid of the implications of building a new international crossing between the two. Therefore, the bill on their rights and privileges in our country. our community is very much interested in what a bill like this might mean for averting potential terrorist attacks that involve our economic infrastructure. Hon. Peter Van Loan: Frankly, Mr. Speaker, my experience is very different. I actually commend the Islamic community for its Could the government House leader give those in our community effective efforts to work together with law enforcement and the a sense of how much debate has already been invested in this and Canadian Security Intelligence Service. My experience is that the when we can look forward to legislation that would start to protect us community has been overwhelmingly exemplary in its conduct, even further? overwhelmingly exemplary in communicating when it is aware of Hon. Peter Van Loan: Mr. Speaker, our borders are some of the threats or have concerns about radicalization in the community, and most sensitive areas in terms of combatting terrorist threats. In my that is good. time as public safety minister working with the Obama administra- tion, this was a matter of great concern to it. It wanted to work hand in hand with us and we did, in fact, a great deal in seeking to provide it the assurances it needed. There are elements of this legislation and That is a good example to all of us and a good reassurance to previous legislation that move us down that path of providing the many Canadians that, indeed, the kind of country we have, one that assurances that are actually important for our economy. involves the diversity of people, is not one that is broken into camps, but is overwhelmingly composed of people with all kinds of Unfortunately, one of the things we occasionally see is an backgrounds who share in common a belief in our country, the overreaction on the national security side in the United States, which values that it holds, our democracy, keeping it safe and secure, has the side effect, unintended, I believe, but a genuine side effect, of combatting terrorist threats and preventing them from arising within slowing commerce at the borders. That is why we have been their communities. This is something in which we can call take working, in our partnership with the United States, to get, for comfort. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13271

Government Orders However, the risk is very real. We have seen the occasions most security to be shared. The information to be shared is only for that recently where radicalization has occurred. A lot of it has been person, not for everybody, identified as a threat to national security. individual self-radicalization, a lot of it prompted by material on the Canadians understand that. They realize they are not a threat to Internet. That is why this bill seeks to address exactly that kind of national security, that it will not affect them. radicalization, one that is not necessarily easy for others in the community to detect. The good news is, as we know, in both of these cases they were on the radar screen. Unfortunately, we did not have That is why I say there are many people who demonstrate with all the tools in place to prevent the terrorist attacks from occurring at legitimate concerns because they think the bill will do something the time. that it will not. However, the bill is quite narrow, quite focused and focused on national security in the way it should be. ● (1250) [Translation] The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin): Before I go to Ms. Charmaine Borg (Terrebonne—Blainville, NDP): Mr. questions and comments, I want to remind all members that when Speaker, there has been a great deal of opposition to this bill. the question is being answered, popping up before the answer is delivered will not get them to the top of the list. If that behaviour We have seen demonstrators in the streets of Montreal, Toronto, were rewarded, we would have 50 members on their feet all the time. Vancouver and across the country. Our online petition has been Therefore, if members stand earlier, they in fact will not be signed by 200,000 Canadians who oppose this bill because they recognized, as opposed to be recognized. think it goes too far and violates our rights and freedoms.

The government seems very pleased to be able to pass this bill Questions and comments, the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf very quickly, without allowing us to really study it or even hold a Islands real debate. To date there has been only one day of debate at this stage, and that was a Friday. We know that Friday is usually the day when bills are expedited. Therefore, the fact that we are debating a Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP): Mr. Speaker, time allocation motion is really problematic for me. I would like to remind the House that the bill was rushed through the committee process, the witnesses were piled on and pushed through I want to know what this government has to say to the 200,000 in a week in which there was not adequate time to even learn what Canadians who have signed the online petition and to the thousands the witnesses before committee had to say, much less to hear from of demonstrators who took to the streets to protest against this ill- people who were not called, like the Privacy commissioner, or a very conceived bill. important witness who then appeared at the Senate. I refer to Joe [English] Fogarty who was a U.K. espionage security expert. He had worked with MI5 and the British Police, and also as a liaison officer to Hon. Peter Van Loan: Mr. Speaker, first, it is ironic that the Canada. member has twice voted today to shut down the House, twice voted to ensure there is no debate in the House of Commons today, twice voted to ensure we all go home early, and then she complains that This is the key point on why we must not shut down debate on there is not enough opportunity for debate. I see a bit of irony in that. the bill in the House. The bill would not protect us from terrorism. The bill, due to the recklessness of the Conservatives, would put us However, in terms of those who have concerns, we recognize their at greater risk of terrorist attack. That is the advice from experts. The concerns. However, I have found that with those who are concerned bill, according to Joe Fogarty, would lead us down a disaster waiting and with my constituents when I speak with them, those concerns are to happen with no oversight, none, because the Conservative largely driven by a misunderstanding or lack of information, perhaps administration eliminated the inspector general for CSIS, has put in from members of the opposition, perhaps from others. For example, no judicial oversight or parliamentary oversight. This bill must be many are concerned that all their information will be shared across stopped. all departments of government, notwithstanding privacy laws. That would not be the case. What the bill says is that if, for ● (1255) example, a passport officer is looking at an application of somebody who has as their sponsor a person who is a known recruiter of people Hon. Peter Van Loan: Mr. Speaker, the legislation was to participate in jihad abroad and we know the individual wants a introduced January 30. It is now April 30. The bill has been before passport to go to Syria for that purpose, should the passport officer Parliament and a parliamentary committee and debated for some be able to share that information with the Canadian Security quarter year right now, a quarter of a year and we do not even have Intelligence Service? This is a person who is linked to someone report stage approval yet. In that context, one can see this has been known to be radicalizing, who has the intention of travelling and out in the public realm. maybe he or she should be watched. According to the NDP, that information should not be allowed to Our government's commitment is to ensure that this becomes law be shared. The Canadian Security Intelligence Service should not be before we rise in June. Remember, it still has to go through a whole allowed to be informed of that. It objects to the information-sharing parallel series of steps in the other chamber. Therefore, if we want to provisions of the proposed legislation that would allow, in a case like do that, it is important that we ensure members get a chance to vote that, information of a person who is identified as a threat to national and decide on this matter. 13272 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Government Orders However, the hon. member is quite mistaken. She said that there in objective oversight is in that expert committee and in the judicial was no judicial oversight. I really would encourage her to read the warrants. bill. Expanded powers of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service require judicial oversight, a warrant from a judge, in order to ● (1300) exercise its expanded powers of disruption. That is significant oversight. It is judicial oversight. It is exactly that kind of ill- Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims (Newton—North Delta, NDP): Mr. informed and incorrect statement that causes alarm among the Speaker, I want to remind the House what we are debating right now. public. It is actually a move by the Conservative government to shut down debate on Bill C-51. We want to have a debate, but there is no point having years of debate if people will not take the time to read the legislation and I remember being in this House and being told that time allocation learn the facts on which we are debating. Judicial oversight is there, had to be moved at second reading so that we could go to committee it is significant and it is powerful to protect human rights. where in-depth discussions would be had. Lo and behold when we Hon. Wayne Easter (Malpeque, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, just to got to the committee stage, there were very restrictive time correct the government House leader, there is not judicial oversight. allocations. We as the opposition had to fight for more time, and There is judicial authorization for CSIS folks to do certain things. only a little bit more was granted. That is a different thing entirely from oversight as our Five Eyes partners have. I cannot understand why the government is so Now here we are, when we, as parliamentarians, have an reluctant to have proper parliamentary oversight, as does our Five opportunity to stand up and present our constituents' perspectives, Eyes partners. That is what is really required with this bill and what to take part in that debate, and once again I am being denied that is missing. opportunity because the government is using the bullying tactics of the power of the majority to tyrannize and silence the voices of those The government House leader went on at great length to talk about who oppose this legislation. how long this bill has been debated. I would in fact agree with his arguments where he was arguing the point about the sharing of What does the government have to hide? information. That is the kind of information he gave in that response that Canadians need to have. We agree with the sharing of Hon. Peter Van Loan: Mr. Speaker, I am delighted the hon. information with limitations. However, his argument there shows member had an opportunity to get up to speak to Bill C-51 today. that there needs to be more time given for the debate of this bill, a She just got a chance to participate in the debate on Bill C-51. The bill which a lot of Canadians have concerns about. It needs to be reason I like that is that twice today she voted to keep us from explained in a way that Canadians understand all the aspects of the debating. Twice today she voted to shut down this House. Twice bill. today already she has voted to go home, turn on the TV, kick up her feet and relax, to shut down the House of Commons. Instead, This closure motion is another affront that is in fact undermining because the government wanted to proceed, we are here debating democracy and debate in this place. The government continues to Bill C-51 right now. I am glad she has that opportunity to do that. resist accepting amendments from this side of the House. We are all MPs. We all represent people. Our amendments make sense, too. Of course, I will point the member once again to the statistics. Our Why will the government not accept them? government's approach has been one of using time allocation as a Hon. Peter Van Loan: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is a very scheduling device. The result, compared with other parliaments, significant person to speak to this, because he was actually solicitor compared with the United Kingdom, for example, is held out time general of Canada. As solicitor general of Canada, he was and time again as the best example of robust debate. We debate at responsible for this legislation. If he believed that parliamentary every stage on bills, on average, much longer than they do in the oversight above and beyond the public safety committee was United Kingdom Parliament. That is because our approach is one necessary, he would have introduced that when he was minister, but that facilitates debate, but also one that prevents the gridlock we see as minister, he did not see fit to do that. I think that speaks well to the south of the border where decisions never get made because of fact that he thought, as does this government, that the after-the-fact overly partisan filibusters. review that is provided by the Security Intelligence Review Committee is a significant form of review. In fact, we are seeking We want to give members of Parliament a chance to actually vote to make it even more effective, and not by politicizing it. The on the questions that are important to Canadians, to pass judgment opposition would like to have politicians doing the review. We on them. That is particularly important on a question as central as actually believe it is better to have independent experts do the combatting terrorism and keeping Canadians safe, something which review. Canadians expect their members of Parliament to work on and make decisions on. That is the direction in which we are taking the Security Intelligence Review Committee. When I talk to my constituents and [Translation] ask them who they would prefer to have providing oversight, judges beforehand and experts after the fact or a bunch of politicians, they Mr. Denis Blanchette (Louis-Hébert, NDP): Mr. Speaker, I want say that politicians have their role, and it is important, they can pass to come back to what the Leader of the Government in the House of the legislation, they have a committee, but that their real confidence Commons just said. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13273

Government Orders Perhaps we debate for so long because the government ignores all I would like to ask the hon. government House leader, what the amendments we propose. Obviously, the role of the government would it be like in Canada if we looked back on an incident like 9/11 in the House of Commons is to propose legislation. However, the and realized if only we had talked to each other we could have role of the opposition is to critique it and propose ways to improve it. stopped it? That is part of the opposition's duty, but this government almost Hon. Peter Van Loan: Mr. Speaker, this has been one of the most never takes our proposals into account. frustrating things. One would have thought after the 9/11 commis- It is no wonder that debates drag on, because the government does sion identified the many intelligence failures by the siloed approach, not want to listen to reason. Our goal is not necessarily to prevent a by the inability of departments to communicate with each other and bill from passing, but rather to improve it. In this case, as the Leader provide intelligence to each other, we would recognize here in of the Opposition clearly stated, our goal is to have a safer Canada the importance of that. Our government has. It is long environment while still protecting our rights. overdue. That is why this legislation will permit information sharing between departments of individuals who represent a threat to Does the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons national security. I used the very good and very real example of an recognize that if his government accepted more of the opposition's individual who applies for a passport and has as a reference someone amendments, debates would be more harmonious and our work here who is a radicalist recruiter. Should the passport office be allowed to would be more effective? share that information with the Canadian Security Intelligence [English] Service so the person is watched? The NDP oppose that. We support that. Hon. Peter Van Loan: Mr. Speaker, the legislation has been improved through amendments that were made at committee. If we The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin): The 30 minutes can ever get to the report stage debate, all members of the House will having expired, the question is on the motion. have an opportunity to debate them and vote on them. That is what Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? we would like to see on the legislation improved, as he said, by the amendments that were made. However, make no mistake. We are not Some hon. members: Agreed. going to allow opposition to be manifested in a form that is simply lengthy filibustering debate and by keeping the bill from passing, Some hon. members: No. because we know the NDP opposes the bill. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin): All those in favour of We think it is important because we need to have measures that, the motion will please say yea. for example, criminalize for the first time the advocacy of terrorism. That is incredibly important. Right now people can go out, declare Some hon. members: Yea. jihad and encourage people to go out and kill non-believers. That should be a criminal offence. We will, for the first time, allow with The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin): All those opposed judicial warrant removal of terrorist propaganda online that has been will please say nay. a factor in radicalization time and time again of people who have Some hon. members: Nay. committed acts in this country and people who have travelled abroad to participate in jihad. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin): In my opinion the yeas have it. We are going to, for the first time, give the Canadian Security Intelligence Service the opportunity to disrupt plots while they are And five or more members having risen: under way in such a fashion that will allow them to unfold while keeping the public safe and thereby enhancing the prospects of The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin): Call in the members. prosecution, which I think all of us agree is a preferable approach to ● (1345) dealing with terrorism. (The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the Of course, we are improving the passenger protect program, the following division:) so-called no-fly list. Right now, we cannot prevent someone who we know is planning to participate in a terrorist act abroad from (Division No. 389) boarding a plane as long as the person is not a risk to the plane or aviation itself. That is unduly limited. We need to expand the YEAS passenger protect program to allow a refusal of boarding for anyone Members who plans to participate in a terrorist act or to join a terrorist organization anywhere. Ablonczy Adler Aglukkaq Albas ● (1305) Albrecht Alexander Hon. Laurie Hawn (Edmonton Centre, CPC): Mr. Speaker, in Allen (Tobique—Mactaquac) Allison Ambler Ambrose the aftermath of 9/11, many things were determined. One of them Anders Anderson was that the agencies were not speaking to each other and there was Armstrong Aspin a very real opportunity beforehand to have stopped 9/11 in its tracks Barlow Bateman if only they had been sharing information. Benoit Bergen 13274 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Government Orders

Bezan Block Easter Fortin Boughen Braid Freeman Fry Breitkreuz Brown (Leeds—Grenville) Garneau Garrison Brown (Newmarket—Aurora) Butt Genest Genest-Jourdain Calandra Calkins Goodale Gravelle Cannan Carmichael Groguhé Harris (Scarborough Southwest) Carrie Chisu Chong Clarke Harris (St. John's East) Hughes Crockatt Daniel Julian Kellway Dechert Dreeshen Lamoureux Lapointe Dykstra Eglinski Latendresse Laverdière Falk Fantino Liu MacAulay Fast Findlay (Delta—Richmond East) Mai Marston Finley (Haldimand—Norfolk) Fletcher Martin Masse Galipeau Gallant Mathyssen May Gill Glover McCallum McGuinty Goguen Goldring Michaud Morin (Chicoutimi—Le Fjord) Gourde Harris (Cariboo—Prince George) Hawn Hayes Morin (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine) Morin (Laurentides—Labelle) Hillyer Hoback Morin (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot) Murray Holder James Nantel Nash Kamp (Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission) Keddy (South Shore—St. Margaret's) Nicholls Nunez-Melo Kenney (Calgary Southeast) Kent Papillon Patry Kerr Komarnicki Péclet Pilon Kramp (Prince Edward—Hastings) Lake Quach Rafferty Lauzon Leef Rankin Rathgeber Lemieux Leung Ravignat Raynault Lizon Lobb Lukiwski MacKay (Central Nova) Regan Sandhu MacKenzie Maguire Scarpaleggia Scott Mayes McColeman Sellah Sgro McLeod Menegakis Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor) Miller Moore (Fundy Royal) Sims (Newton—North Delta) Nicholson Norlock Sitsabaiesan Stewart Obhrai Oliver Sullivan Toone O'Neill Gordon Opitz Tremblay Trudeau–— 104 O'Toole Paradis Payne Perkins Poilievre Preston PAIRED Raitt Reid Nil Rempel Richards Rickford Ritz The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin): I declare the motion Saxton Schellenberger carried. Seeback Shea Shipley Shory Sopuck Sorenson Stanton Strahl *** Sweet Tilson Toet Trost Trottier Truppe CITIZEN VOTING ACT Uppal Van Kesteren BILL C-50—TIME ALLOCATION MOTION Van Loan Warawa Warkentin Watson Weston (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country) Hon. Peter Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House Weston (Saint John) of Commons, CPC): Mr. Speaker: I move: Williamson Wong Woodworth Yelich That, in relation to Bill C-50, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act, not more Young (Oakville) Young (Vancouver South) than one further sitting day shall be allotted to the consideration at second reading Yurdiga Zimmer–— 134 stage of the bill; and That, 15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for government orders on NAYS the day allotted to the consideration at second reading stage of the said bill, any Members proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this order, and, in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the Allen (Welland) Angus bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment. Ashton Atamanenko Ayala Bélanger The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin): Before we proceed Bennett Benskin Bevington Blanchette with the 30-minute question and comment period, pursuant to Blanchette-Lamothe Boivin Standing Order 67(1), I would like to provide a brief explanation as Borg Brahmi Brison Caron to how we will proceed today. Casey Cash Charlton Chicoine The situation the House finds itself in at this point appears to be Chisholm Choquette Christopherson Cleary unprecedented. That is, the time stipulated in the Standing Orders for Comartin Côté the start of statements by members, which today is 2 p.m., will arrive Cotler Crowder before the time for the 30-minute questions and comments period for Cullen Cuzner Davies (Vancouver Kingsway) Day the time allocation motion will have expired. Having not Dion Dionne Labelle encountered this before, the Chair has had to consider how best to Donnelly Doré Lefebvre Dubé Dubourg proceed in the interest of the House while, of course, respecting the Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona) Dusseault rules and practices of the House. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13275

Government Orders What has made this difficult in this instance is that the committee Talking to the form and substance of the bill here today, this bill that created the procedure, the modernization committee, does not speaks, of course, to the Frank ruling that came out in May 2014, seem to have envisaged this and so provides us no guidance, and in which has material impacts on the upcoming election. That is why it addition, no specific reason or justification for not interrupting to is prudent for the House to move forward and consider this bill, as it proceed with the statements by members, a procedure the Standing deals with material changes that will impact the voting process, Orders clearly stipulate will start at 2 p.m. because of this ruling, in the upcoming election.

Thus, this is what we will do in this instance. I will point out that I did read my colleague's speech from a previous round of debate, and he actually agreed with some of the There are, of course, opportunities for the House to resume and content of this bill, including the need to ensure that the 40,000 non- finish the procedure at a time determined by the government. Since, citizens who are on the registry be removed, which this bill would as I have said, we are in unchartered waters, the way we will proceed provide for. this time is not necessarily to be looked upon as a precedent. As always, the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, ● (1355) which is responsible for reviews of the rules of the House, may want Mr. Scott Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Wind- to look at this very question, and if it desires, provide the House with sor, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, back to the substance of the bill once more, recommendations on how to proceed in such situations in the future. one of the issues brought up by the Chief Electoral Officer was the fact that time is not on Election Canada's side for this. That was In short, we shall begin the question and comment period now. It several months ago, so we should have a thorough debate about this will be interrupted at 2 o'clock, when we will proceed with to realize that the time impact is going to be great. Getting over Bill statements and following that with question period. When question C-23 was bad enough. Now we have this one. period ends, we will resume the 30-minute debate and subsequent bell and subsequent vote. In addition, there are several questions that need to be asked. For instance, Armed Forces personnel would not be involved, but what Questions and comments, the hon. member for Toronto— about the spouses or partners of these individuals? They would also Danforth. have to go through this routine. As my colleague pointed out, debate ● (1350) is of the essence, because they would have to register each and every Mr. Craig Scott (Toronto—Danforth, NDP): Mr. Speaker, I time internationally. Why not maintain the international list of would like to address my question to the minister. I would also like electors? to thank the House leader for giving us the opportunity to have more Hon. Michelle Rempel: Mr. Speaker, my colleague's question people in the House to listen to exactly why the government is had two components. shutting down debate again, for the 95th time in this Parliament. With regard to time for coming into force, I believe that Elections It is very clear that Bill C-50 is a bill the Conservative government Canada would have time to prepare for this. Many of the new rules does not want Canadians to know about. It has only received one day that would be put in place by this bill would actually be extensions of debate so far. The Conservatives have had six months to push it of existing rules, so there is precedent that could be applied. Of through, and now, on a Thursday, with debate on the bill scheduled course, having us proceed to the committee stage of this review and for tomorrow, Friday, they want to slip through the fact that, having us proceed with debate would allow officials to have as much following Bill C-23, Bill C-50 is a deliberate attempt to suppress the time as possible, which is why it would be prudent for the opposition votes of citizens abroad. to vote to send this to committee stage.

There is a nonsensical creation of a barrier in the bill that would With regard to the components on diplomats and special forces make it very difficult for many Canadians abroad to register in time officers and how they would apply, again, this would align our rules to vote. The minister knows that. There is also a stripping of powers for international voting with how people can vote here in Canada, so from the Chief Electoral Officer to determine what ID is sufficient there would be a similar set of rules. I would note, as the member for citizens abroad. correctly pointed out, that there are special rules in place for Armed Forces members who are serving overseas, and those rules would There are all sorts of things that have actually not registered yet on continue to apply. the radar screen of the media or citizens, and one of the reasons the Conservative government does not want the bill fully debated is [Translation] exactly that. When Canadians come to realize that it is step two after Mr. Raymond Côté (Beauport—Limoilou, NDP): Mr. Speaker, the former unfair elections act, they will resist, along with the official it makes me laugh every time a government member claims to be a opposition. victim of the procedural war that is going on right now. Hon. Michelle Rempel (Minister of State (Western Economic Diversification), CPC): Mr. Speaker, first of all, to push back on The minister of state could never criticize the opposition for some of my colleague's false assumptions, I think it is worth noting defending itself against this cheap gamesmanship we have to endure. that it was the NDP today that tried to shut down debate and adjourn This is the second time allocation motion today. The minister is the House. Therefore, in terms of wanting debate today, I think that following in the footsteps of the Leader of the Government in the is a little rich. House of Commons and claiming to be a victim of the big bad NDP. 13276 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Statements by Members Really, she is the one who is betraying the very spirit of the work STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS of this House. She is betraying her role as a member of Parliament by preventing us, the representatives of the people, from expressing [English] ourselves. How is she going to face her voters and explain this denial of PUTTING ON THE GLITZ democracy? [English] Mr. Randy Kamp (Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, CPC): Mr. Speaker, high school graduation marks an important Hon. Michelle Rempel: Mr. Speaker, I am so glad that my milestone in the life of a student, yet there are some who find it colleague opposite used the term “victim” to talk about legislation difficult to participate fully in the celebration, often due to the cost. that goes through this House, because it has been our government in this Parliament that has actually put forward substantive laws to “Putting on the Glitz” is a grassroots initiative in my riding that protect victims of crime, many of which the NDP did not oppose. Of provides underprivileged students with formal attire so that they can course, we did that by ensuring that bills received timely debate and take part in their graduation with pride. Most of these students would timely passage through the House of Commons. not be able to join in without this assistance. Some of those bills include the Protecting Canadians from Online Crime Act, the tougher penalties for child predators act, and the A committee of volunteers from local community service Victims Bill of Rights Act. agencies, School District 42 and other generous partners put together an evening where students can choose their formal wear and All of these are legacies of our government. I find it very rich that accessories for their upcoming graduation, have their hair styled and my colleague opposite is portraying himself as a victim, when in makeup done by local professionals, and have their pictures taken by fact, he did not stand up for these pieces of legislation. a graduation photographer. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, my question is in regard to the issue I have consistently brought up, Please join me in thanking the “Putting on the Glitz” volunteers which is the use of time allocation. It shows the government's lack of for their great work for the third year in a row and congratulating the respect for democratic process. students of Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission who will be Why does the government House leader feel that the only way the graduating in the coming weeks. Conservatives can get legislation through the House of Commons is through time allocation? By doing that, they are really saying that *** they do not have the ability to negotiate in good faith with opposition parties, which is not healthy for democracy inside the House. Would [Translation] the government House leader not agree? ● (1400) MORELLE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IN SAINT-UBALDE Hon. Michelle Rempel: Mr. Speaker, I find myself explaining Ms. Élaine Michaud (Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, NDP): Mr. recent history to my colleague opposite. When we came into Speaker, as you know, April 22 was Earth Day, and one of the government in 2006, we had more than a decade of bad policy and elementary schools in my riding of Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier steering the country in the wrong direction that we had to come back celebrated that event in a very special way. and legislate through.

I am very proud of the fact that our government, since it came For nearly five years now, the students and teachers at the Morelle into office, has done things like create over 1.2 million net new jobs elementary school in Saint-Ubalde have been actively involved in a for Canadians since the depths of the economic downturn. I am concerted effort to learn more about the environment and sustainable proud that small businesses would now pay 44% less in taxes, thanks development. Over the years, they have carried out many projects to to this new budget that we have put forward. help protect the environment and preserve the shorelines of Portneuf's many waterways. In order to demonstrate their commit- When we came into office in 2006, Canadians were paying $6,600 ment to this cause, the Morelle elementary school became the first more in taxes and benefits that they were not receiving. Our elementary school in the Portneuf school board to adopt a charter of government has gotten things done for Canadians, it has put through environmental and sustainable development education. some substantive legislation, and we have had meaningful debate in committee and all of these sorts of things. I would like to recognize the efforts of this school's young My question for my colleague is why would he not support us, but students, the principal, Marie-Claude Gignac, and all of the teaching I guess I have my answer, because he is part of the Liberal Party of staff who worked together to carry out this inspiring project. Canada. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin): The Chair must This sort of initiative not only helps children become engaged and interrupt at this time. I remind hon. members that there will be 21 responsible citizens in the future, but it also sets a good example for minutes remaining in this period after question period. all of us to follow. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13277

Statements by Members [English] Alimentaire Lotbinière, FADOQ and the choir. As a knight, father and husband, he is a true ambassador for family values and charity. FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS Mr. John Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest, CPC): Mr. Richard Desrochers has been married since 1976 to Suzanne Speaker, I recently applied for a credit card from a major financial Mercier, who supports him in all of his initiatives with the Knights of institution I do banking with. I am appalled at the depth and scope of Columbus. He has three children and eight grandchildren. the questions I was asked by one of the country's leading banks. Particularly, I was told my information could be shared with any of I congratulate Richard Desrochers for all of his work with the its other business operations. The banks are simply asking and, Knights of Columbus and for his humanitarian service to all obviously, collecting too much information from Canadians, right Quebeckers. down to the amount I pay for rent, my building fee, and even the liquidation value of my 2007 F-150. *** Respect is a two-way street and Canadians are entitled to it when dealing with our banks. If my treatment is typical, and I certainly [English] hope it is not, then we are not getting that respect. We all have credit trouble at some point in our lives, so what was equally egregious is OFFICERS OF THE LAKE SUPERIOR SCOTTISH being told the card's interest rate at 20% rises to 25% if a payment is REGIMENT AND GARRISON OFFICERS' MESS missed by the due date. When the prime lending rate is at 3%, this is near extortion on working families and makes payday loans look like Mr. John Rafferty (Thunder Bay—Rainy River, NDP): Mr. a giveaway. Speaker, this past weekend, It was my distinct honour to be invited to the 69th military ball hosted by the Officers of the Lake Superior *** Scottish Regiment and Garrison Officers' Mess. Let me offer a HERBERT H. CARNEGIE FUTURE ACES FOUNDATION special thanks to Major David Ratz and the entire 2015 ball planning committee for organizing a wonderful evening, with a special Hon. Judy Sgro (York West, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to mention to the incomparable MacGillivray Pipe Band. congratulate the winners of the Herbert H. Carnegie Future Aces Foundation scholarships and awards for 2015. Karissa Hufnagel, Canadians might not know that Thunder Bay is known as the Tamara Twumwah-Ofori and Lillian Grant are just another example “City of the Poppy”. On July 5, 1921, the Great War Veterans' of three extraordinary women from the Jane-Finch community who Association, a forerunner of the Royal Canadian Legion, held their received these prestigious awards last Friday night. national organizational meeting in Port Arthur, Ontario. There, they I had the opportunity to meet with the three young winners and approved the poppy to be worn on the anniversary of Armistice Day. their families, and I was truly impressed. The Future Aces award is Within a year, all Legion branches across the country wore the given each year to students who endeavour to respect others poppy as a means of remembrance. regardless of race, language, creed or colour, and it seeks to recognize those who work each day to make a difference for others Thousands of men and women from northwestern Ontario have and for Canada. Karissa, Tamara and Lillian have set a powerful served in the defence of Canada. Lest we forget. example for all of us by demonstrating the importance of embracing diversity as a strength and a societal asset. *** On behalf of the Liberal caucus and all members of the House, I congratulate and thank the Herbert H. Carnegie Future Aces 4-H Foundation and all of the recipients for their sacrifices and Mr. Bev Shipley (Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, CPC): Mr. encouragement. They make us all proud. Speaker, growing up, I was part of 4-H and have some great *** memories of that time. Today, young 4-H representatives from across Canada have come to visit Parliament Hill and observe question ● (1405) period. They are the future of Canadian agriculture. [Translation] RICHARD DESROCHERS Earlier this year, our agriculture committee had the opportunity to hear from representatives of the Canadian Young Farmers' Forum, Mr. Jacques Gourde (Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, many of whom have had past involvement with 4-H. The knowledge CPC): Mr. Speaker, I would like to pay tribute to Richard and experience that these young farmers bring to the table is quite Desrochers, the state deputy of the Quebec Knights of Columbus, incredible. Farmers and the agriculture industry are the backbone of who lives in my riding. He has helped the Knights of Columbus our country. As a government we will continue to do what we can to movement thrive across Quebec. help make sure that industry sector remains strong and viable. He joined the Knights of Columbus in 1991 and quickly rose through the ranks in his council, taking on many responsibilities I would like to recognize the 4-H youth for their commitment and where he was able to act on his values of friendship and service, dedication to our industry and to Canada, and wish them all the best most notably with the Fondation Maison de la Famille, Aide in their future endeavours.. 13278 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Statements by Members MARVEN MCCARTHY Sadly, the Liberals and the NDP have a different plan. They want Mrs. Tilly O'Neill Gordon (Miramichi, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I higher taxes on Canadian families. They want higher taxes on rise in the House today to pay tribute to the memory of a dear friend, middle-class seniors. They want higher taxes on middle-class a great Irishman and a true Miramichier. Marven McCarthy passed consumers. away suddenly, surrounded by his loving family. That is not the right plan and that is why we will continue to cut Marven has been described as a travel agent, a tour guide, a fund taxes for Canadian families. raising expert, guardian of Middle Island and a champion of all things Irish-Canadian. Most important, he was a generous Christian, *** an amazing husband, father, grandfather, son and brother. Born and [Translation] raised in Miramichi, Marven spent his entire life on the river. He fulfilled his life's journey by teaching high school math to countless GATINEAU PARK young people at James M. Hill High School. His spirit and passion for community was shown as he gave tours of Middle Island, and Mr. Mathieu Ravignat (Pontiac, NDP): Mr. Speaker, for the past imparted many life lessons to the hundreds of athletes he coached nine years, the Conservatives have done nothing but turn their backs and managed. on the people of the Outaouais. With their savage cuts to the public service, they have deprived thousands of workers of a steady income Marven is remembered by his loving wife Mary Ann, their and poisoned the work environment for thousands more. children and grandchildren. He will be missed by all who had the pleasure to know him and who have been affected by his generous Refusing to back down, they even went as far as blocking the bill and passionate spirit. to protect Gatineau Park that was sponsored by my colleague, the member for Hull—Aylmer. That was one year ago today. The *** purpose of the bill was to provide legal protection to one of the most [Translation] visited parks in Canada, a park that is truly at the heart of the identity and the economy of the Outaouais. There is a reason this bill was CHAMBLY SEIGNEURY 350TH ANNIVERSARY supported by experts and thousands of Canadians. Mr. Matthew Dubé (Chambly—Borduas, NDP): Mr. Speaker, 2015 is the 350th anniversary of the arrival of the very first French During the debate, the Conservatives and their Liberal friends told regiment, the Carignan-Salières regiment, in New France. us that they had a better plan for our park—and we are still waiting.

When Captain Jacques de Chambly and his soldiers built a *** wooden fort in 1665, they laid the foundations of our great story. Some months later, Henri Chastelard de Salières built Fort Sainte- [English] Thérèse on the banks of the Richelieu River where the town of Carignan now sits. VIETNAMESE COMMUNITY Mr. Mark Adler (York Centre, CPC): Mr. Speaker, today marks Paul-Henri Hudon, president of the historical society of the 40 years since the capital of the Republic of South Vietnam fell to seigneury of Chambly, described it like this: the communist invaders from the north. The seigneury of Chambly was born 350 years ago, and along with two parishes, it would become what we now know as the municipalities of Carignan, Chambly, An iron curtain of totalitarianism fell upon the democratic south. Richelieu, Saint-Basile-le-Grand and Saint-Mathias-sur-Richelieu. Many were sent to political re-education camps, tortured, beaten, and We have a duty to remember. I invite all of my colleagues and killed. More than two million people from the south fled by any constituents to join me this summer at the festivities celebrating this means possible. Many escaped on makeshift rafts. They set out to 350th anniversary and the 50th anniversary of the town of Carignan. sea in search of freedom. Some 250,000 of these boat people, as they became known, died at sea from drowning, starvation, thirst, and *** hunger. ● (1410) [English] For more than 60,000, a safe haven was found in Canada. In 1979-1980, the Conservative government of the time, with the help TAXATION of churches, synagogues, communities, and just plain old folks, Mr. Chris Warkentin (Peace River, CPC): Mr. Speaker, this offered them a home in Canada. week the Leader of the NDP called our tax cuts, “giveaways”. On this side of the House, we will never make any apologies for The Vietnamese community now numbers more than 300,000 allowing Canadians to keep more of their hard-earned money in their strong. They are fearlessly proud Canadians. Many are here in own pockets. That is why we are cutting taxes for middle-class Ottawa today to mark the 40th anniversary of the start of their Canadian families through the family tax cut and the enhanced journey. As a country, we are marking the passage of the Journey to universal child care benefit. Freedom Day Act, now enshrined in Canadian law. These measures will benefit 100% of Canadian families with All Canadians of Vietnamese descent, and all those who came to kids, leaving every family with more money in their own pockets to this country in search of hope and opportunity, have made Canada spend as they choose. the best country in the world. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13279

Oral Questions [Translation] Let us just look at the Auditor General of Ontario, who is warning that the Liberal gang there is stripping the rules so it can flood the JOURNEY TO FREEDOM DAY airways with partisan advertising. Hon. Stéphane Dion (Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, under legislation unanimously passed by Parliament, every What do these Liberals here have to say about it? They say not a year on April 30, Canadians will now celebrate their fellow citizens peep, not from the likes of Gerald Butts who wrote the Ontario of Vietnamese origin. Our country will commemorate the boat Liberal playbook. The Liberal position is really clear: they are people and other Vietnamese refugees who came here and became a against partisan advertising, unless they get to do it; they support part of our country, reminding us that Canada always comes out labour rights, unless they are trashing collective bargaining rights on stronger when it is welcoming, confident and generous. Parliament Hill; they claim to be defenders of the Charter, except when they are supporting Bill C-51. It is Tweedledee and [English] Tweedledum, two tired old parties cut from the same cloth. All together, without excluding anyone, every year we will Canadians know the difference, and they are going to show both commemorate the Vietnamese Canadian community's personal and parties the door come this election. collective sacrifices and celebrate the promising opportunities made theirs, and ours, in a Canada made stronger by their welcome *** presence and outstanding contributions. LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA Every year, we will celebrate together the uplifting symbiosis that Ms. Roxanne James (Scarborough Centre, CPC): Mr. Speaker, arose between the Canadian and Vietnamese identities. What a great unlike the Liberal Party, we have been very clear. We have no opportunity to remember where we come from, to better understand intention of legalizing or decriminalizing marijuana. The chiefs of where we want to go together. police have also been very clear that they do not support legalizing marijuana. *** ● (1415) Now that he has joined the Liberal Party, Bill Blair has flip- flopped and now wants to legalize marijuana, which would make it TAXATION easier for children to smoke pot. Already he puts it on equal footing Mr. Devinder Shory (Calgary Northeast, CPC): Mr. Speaker, with alcohol and is already planning to, as he says “tax the thing” now that the Prime Minister has balanced the federal budget, our and “control the price”. government is working to help hard-working families balance theirs. Unlike Mr. Blair and the Liberal Party, we do not intend to That is why we are expanding the universal child care benefit to compromise on the safety of our youth. These drugs are illegal make it available to every single Canadian family with a child. because of the harmful effects they have on users and on our society. However, there are up to 200,000 families who may not get the One can only wonder how Mr. Blair can feel comfortable now that money that is owed to them if they do not apply. Across Canada, this he belongs in the same basket as Liberal supporters such as drug- represents millions of dollars in unclaimed benefits. pushing Marc and Jodie Emery. Families who are not currently receiving the universal child care benefit, who have never received the benefit, or who have never applied for the Canada child tax benefit and still have children under ORAL QUESTIONS 18 in their care must apply. [Translation] It is important that they do so quickly because the deadline is tomorrow to apply and receive the benefit in July. To sign up, please ETHICS go to Canada.ca/taxsavings. This money is owed to 200,000 Mr. Peter Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster, NDP): Mr. families, and our Conservative government is working very hard Speaker, we are still waiting for the Prime Minister to respond to the to make sure that they get it. disturbing allegations that Mike Duffy himself raised concerns about being appointed as a senator for Prince Edward Island when he was a *** resident of Ontario. LIBERAL PARTY OF CANADA The Constitution is clear: a senator must reside in the province for Mr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP): Mr. Speaker, which he or she is appointed. stop the press. The Prime Minister has to answer sooner or later. What did the The Liberal Party finally has a policy of sorts. It is their outrage Prime Minister do when Mike Duffy told him he was not a resident about the Conservatives using taxpayers' dollars on partisan of Prince Edward Island? advertising. Now, I agree that is unacceptable. [English] I remember a time when the last Liberal government shamelessly Mr. Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime raided the treasury for its own partisan ads. The Liberal brand has Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC): Mr. Speaker, not changed much. I have already answered that question on a number of occasions. 13280 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Oral Questions How disappointed Canadians must be this morning. They work invested heavily in the automotive industry. We have saved 50,000 hard, they play by the rules, and yet again they find out that the New jobs. Of course we are providing, through our capital cost allowance, Democrats are using their money callously. There are 68 of them to manufacturers a significant tax break, and we will continue to who are accused of illegally using taxpayer resources for illegal invest in job-creating companies. offices, and 23 of them for inappropriate mailings. They were forced to pay back $350,000 worth of illegal union donations. They were *** charged $40,000 for illegal robocalls. Now we find out that working in the office of the Leader of the Opposition, using taxpayer [Translation] resources, is a union member who is using taxpayer money for partisan attack. MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY Mr. Peter Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster, NDP): Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives say, “Let's change the subject. We don't Mrs. Sadia Groguhé (Saint-Lambert, NDP): Mr. Speaker, the know any Mike Duffy”, except that 74 Conservative MPs invited Conservative government has become an expert at creating illusions. Mike Duffy to their ridings on the taxpayers' dime. They know him all right; he is really at the heart of Conservative scandals and The Minister of Finance likes to boast that he balanced his budget, entitlement. but it is a smokescreen that poorly masks the real state of the The Prime Minister appointed former senator Mike Duffy. Now Canadian economy, which has been crippled by the Conservatives' we have sources saying that the Prime Minister insisted Duffy poor decisions. represent Prince Edward Island, when he knew he was not a resident there. Did the Prime Minister's Office go to such great lengths to try According to the most recent data, there has been a decline in to bury Duffy's expense scandal because it was trying to protect the manufacturing production for the second month in a row. That is Prime Minister? Is that why there is this cover-up? worrisome because it indicates a continuing economic slowdown. ● (1420) Mr. Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Does the minister have a plan to address the decline of Canadian Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC): Mr. Speaker, manufacturers? as I said, the constitutional practice on this has been clear for almost 150 years. Hon. Joe Oliver (Minister of Finance, CPC): Mr. Speaker, as I said, we have brought forward policies to help manufacturers, and It is also very clear that the NDP members, yet again, are caught we will help all businesses, large and small, by giving them a tax using taxpayer resources inappropriately. To have a member of the regime that is more competitive than that of other countries. union working inside the office of the Leader of the Opposition, doing partisan political work at the expense of the taxpayers, is completely inappropriate. I hope the Leader of the Opposition will In fact, it is already more competitive than the U.S. regime, do the right thing—take a step back and pay the taxpayers back the because the tax rate is 46% lower than that of the U.S. millions of dollars he owes them. He should do the right thing. Mrs. Sadia Groguhé (Saint-Lambert, NDP): Mr. Speaker, the *** decline in manufacturing production translates into the loss of good jobs for Canadian families. There are no measures in the THE BUDGET Conservatives' budget to protect jobs in the manufacturing sector, Mr. Peter Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster, NDP): The and they did nothing to save the 400,000 jobs that have already member is confused, Mr. Speaker. We are not talking about fake disappeared since they came to power. Conservative kangaroo courts; we are talking about real courts with real judges. They should know the difference, because so many Why is the minister not protecting manufacturing jobs that Conservatives are before real courts right now. provide an adequate standard of living for many families in the Here is a question for the finance minister. It would be nice to middle class? have an answer. The Conservative budget would give billions to the wealthy while making the middle class and future generations foot [English] the bill. Today, GM announced it will cut another 1,000 positions in Oshawa. That is 1,000 more people looking for work and 1,000 Hon. Joe Oliver (Minister of Finance, CPC): Mr. Speaker, as I more families struggling harder to make ends meet. With all these have said, we have advanced job-creating businesses large and job losses, why are the Conservatives failing to take real action to small. We have a lower tax regime than those of the other countries protect good Canadian jobs? Will the finance minister maybe answer in the G7, some 46% lower than that of the United States. We have that question? advanced for big companies the accelerated capital cost allowance. For small companies, which are responsible for 50% of the jobs in Hon. Joe Oliver (Minister of Finance, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the private sector, we are moving the tax rate, which we already things are looking good for October, I can say. brought down to 11%, to 9% over the next several years. We, of course, are very concerned about the actions taken by the company, and our hearts go out to the people affected by it. We have This is the most significant tax reduction in 25 years. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13281

Oral Questions ● (1425) Those who speak up are stigmatized as weak. They are called troublemakers. They face retaliation or are labelled unfit for work. NATIONAL DEFENCE Ms. Joyce Murray (Vancouver Quadra, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the Deschamps report on sexual misconduct paints a picture of wilful Why has the government allowed this situation to develop and incompetence and complete disregard for our Armed Forces continue? Our troops never abandon us, so why has the government members. The report speaks of a hostile, sexualized environment, abandoned them? a pervasive culture of misogyny, and ongoing instances of abuse and harassment, particularly against women and LGBTQ members. [English]

Clearly, the Conservatives have been more focused on budget cuts Mr. James Bezan (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of than on protecting the men and women who serve our country. Why National Defence, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the Chief of the Defence on earth have they been ignoring this national disgrace? Staff just acknowledged that this sexual behaviour is inappropriate Mr. James Bezan (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of and has set up a strategic response team under the leadership of National Defence, CPC): Mr. Speaker, we thank Madam Major-General Christine Whitecross. The team is going to start Deschamps for her report. We are deeply concerned by the findings looking at detailed plans on how to address this problem, changing of this report. There is absolutely no place for sexual abuse and the culture and making sure that this problem is addressed misconduct within the Canadian Armed Forces and we support its effectively, and where there are problems, that there are proper goal to eliminate this kind of behaviour. ways to address them and file those complaints outside of the normal processes that are used now. We commend the Canadian Armed Forces for undertaking this review and accepting all 10 of its recommendations. We support the Mr. Jack Harris (St. John's East, NDP): Mr. Speaker, today's Canadian Armed Forces in undertaking a comprehensive action plan report shows a shocking level of sexual misconduct, harassment and to have stronger support for victims, respond more effectively to assault in the Canadian Armed Forces. Military leadership turned a incidents of inappropriate sexual behaviour, and prevent future blind eye to an environment that was rampant with inappropriate and occurrences. criminal behaviour and failed to support victims when they came Ms. Joyce Murray (Vancouver Quadra, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, forward. This is a matter of fundamental justice for women in our according to the report, Canadian Armed Forces members routinely society, a flagrant disregard for women's rights and repeated denial suffer from abuse and assault, including rape. of a systemic problem in the military. The military left victims of sexual assaults and harassments to fend for themselves. Those who speak up are stigmatized as weak. Why is the government not recognizing that profound changes are They are called troublemakers. They face retaliation from peers and required and that the military is not capable and has not shown itself supervisors, or they are labelled unfit for work. to be capable of dealing with sexual assault in its midst? The government had the report for months, yet the budget had not Mr. James Bezan (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of a penny in it to fix this nightmare. National Defence, CPC): Mr. Speaker, we have been very clear. The Conservatives claim they are concerned. Why have they not The Department of National Defence has been clear. The Chief of done anything about it, nor put it in their budget? the Defence Staff and the Canadian Armed Forces have been clear that what has happened is completely unacceptable, that these Mr. James Bezan (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of findings are deeply concerning and that we will continue to move National Defence, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I want to assure the member forward to ensure that all 10 recommendations made by Madam and all members of the House of Commons that all allegations that Deschamps, a retired Supreme Court justice, are implemented. They are reported are investigated, and where appropriate, charges are laid are doing that under the leadership of Major-General Christine and individuals are prosecuted. Whitecross to ensure that all the necessary steps are taken and that In response to Madam Deschamps' findings that some individuals these sexual complaints can be brought forward, as well as charges do not report crimes, the Canadian Armed Forces is now actively laid when appropriate. looking at all of these and are changing how complaints are handled and are received. ● (1430) The Canadian Armed Forces are going to implement best [Translation] practices, such as a sexual assault prevention office, as they have in the United States, which has seen considerable success in addressing these issues. Ms. Élaine Michaud (Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, NDP): Mr. Speaker, an action plan is only a first step. We need to get to the [Translation] bottom of things to understand this systemic failure when it comes to Mr. David McGuinty (Ottawa South, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the the investigation and prosecution of sexual crimes in the military. report found that members of the Canadian Forces routinely suffer Canada's military justice system has completely failed the women from sexual abuse, sexual assault and rape, and that the military is and men who have tried to speak out about sexual misconduct, leaving these victims to fend for themselves. harassment and abuse. 13282 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Oral Questions Will the minister apologize to victims for this shameful behaviour The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bruce Stanton): Order. We are going and accept all of the recommendations in the report? to run out of time. We are just about of time now, actually. [English] The hon. Minister of Finance. Mr. James Bezan (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of [Translation] National Defence, CPC): Mr. Speaker, as I have already said, the Hon. Joe Oliver (Minister of Finance, CPC): Mr. Speaker, we Canadian Armed Forces and the Chief of the Defence Staff have have provided more protections than ever for bank customers and we accepted all the recommendations. They have set up a strategic have done more than any other government. We will continue to help response team under the leadership of Major-General Christine consumers in the future, thanks to our credit rating. What is very Whitecross. They will be bringing forward an entire program on how important is that we have lowered taxes to the levels they were at to deal with this, such as having a sexual assault prevention office, 50 years ago. That is what benefits families the most. similar to what they have done in the United States and other allied countries. *** *** EMPLOYMENT Ms. Peggy Nash (Parkdale—High Park, NDP): Mr. Speaker, CONSUMER PROTECTION we just learned that 1,000 GM workers in Oshawa will be losing Mr. Andrew Cash (Davenport, NDP): Mr. Speaker, when the their jobs. We know that manufacturing sector output slowed in government buckled to NDP pressure to end pay-to-pay fees, they February for the second consecutive month. Instead of taking action made sure that their bank buddies were exempted and it seems that to support the manufacturing sector, the Conservatives are authoriz- they have used that as a green light to start charging hard-working, ing a $500 million-plus loan to help Volkswagen create jobs in middle-class Canadians extra fees to pay their mortgage, to make a Mexico. payment on their credit card, even to pay student loans. This is pay- to-pay fees on steroids. Why are the Conservatives not helping Canadian manufacturers create jobs here? When will the government stop sheltering big banks and their ● (1435) billions in profits and finally ban all pay-to-pay fees? [English] Hon. Joe Oliver (Minister of Finance, CPC): Mr. Speaker, we Hon. Ed Fast (Minister of International Trade, CPC): Mr. are the only government that has stood up for consumers by Speaker, our thoughts are with the workers and their families in lowering taxes and putting more money back in their pockets. We Oshawa during this very difficult time. have taken action to improve low-cost bank accounts and to expand no-cost banking options for more than seven million Canadians. We However, the member has it all wrong. This support is about have introduced a debit card and credit card code of conduct. Our creating new jobs and export opportunities within Canada. This is an government believes that with better information, Canadian interest-bearing loan, not a grant or subsidy. In fact, this loan will consumers can make informed choices which will be in their actually open the door for Canadian manufacturers to export their interests. products to global companies. [Translation] Sadly, the opposition parties want to raise taxes. They want to Ms. Annick Papillon (Québec, NDP): Mr. Speaker, I want to set abandon manufacturing. That is something this government will not the record straight. Under the Conservatives, Canadians are working do. more, but a majority of them are living from paycheque to Ms. Peggy Nash (Parkdale—High Park, NDP): Mr. Speaker, paycheque and are not in a position to save. clearly, the Conservatives have failed to build a balanced economy. Manufacturing output has slipped for the second month in a row, and Although Canadian banks are earning record profits in the billions workers are paying the price. of dollars, they are not satisfied and always want more. Now, customers will be charged fees to pay their mortgage, and We have lost more than 400,000 good manufacturing jobs under transactions are costing all Canadians more and more. Enough is the Conservatives' watch. Now GM has just announced that 1,000 enough. jobs will be lost this year in Oshawa. What is the Conservatives' response? Give money to a German company to build cars in Will the Conservatives finally stand up for the middle class and Mexico hold their banker friends accountable? Just where is their auto manufacturing strategy, and when will the Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Conservatives help the workers and families hit by massive job [English] losses in manufacturing? Hon. Ed Fast (Minister of International Trade, CPC): Mr. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bruce Stanton): Order. This is the Speaker, there is no government that has done more for the second demonstration. We are going to run short on time. manufacturing sector than this Conservative government. The results The hon. Minister of Finance. speak for themselves. The programs that she refers to, since 2003, financing agreements like this one have generated almost $49 billion Some hon. members: Oh, oh! of business and sales for more than 5,000 Canadian companies. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13283

Oral Questions Unlike the opposition parties, we will not abandon our Why are Conservatives forcing working and middle-class manufacturers and we will certainly not tax them to death like the Canadians to pay for their trickle-up economics? NDP wants to. ● (1440) [Translation] Ms. Mylène Freeman (Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, Hon. Joe Oliver (Minister of Finance, CPC): Mr. Speaker, it is NDP): Mr. Speaker, more than 1,000 aerospace jobs have been lost quite remarkable that the opposition does not understand that if the in my riding in the past few years, and now, in Mirabel, we have private sector keeps the money, the money is not lost. The money learned that another 300 Bell Helicopter workers are being laid off. goes to investment and savings, savings for education, retirement and for a first home. When will the Conservatives realize that there needs to be stable investment in the aerospace sector in order to create well-paying jobs Here is a little more information, if the facts mean anything to the in Mirabel and Montreal? opposition. Half of TFSA holders earn less than $42,000 a year and Hon. Ed Holder (Minister of State (Science and Technology), 600,000 seniors with income below $60,000 are currently maximiz- CPC): Mr. Speaker, we are dismayed by this terrible news for the ing their TFSAs. employees and their families. We know that this decision affects the international operations of Bell Helicopter, not just its operations in *** Canada. We do not comment on private sector decisions. The Canadian aerospace sector remains solid and is still one of the most THE ECONOMY innovative in the world. Hon. Scott Brison (Kings—Hants, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, new GDP *** numbers confirm what the Bank of Canada was saying, that Canadian economic growth is atrocious. The fact is that it has not TAXATION grown at all in 2015. In fact, it has shrunk. The manufacturing sector Mr. Guy Caron (Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Bas- has been hit particularly hard, with its output declining by almost a ques, NDP): Mr. Speaker, according to Quebec's finance minister, percentage point in February, following a decline in January. Quebec will lose at least $65 million a year because of the increase in the TFSA limit. The minister was clear about this Conservative When Canadians needed a plan, the Conservatives delayed measure: “I would not have done that.” presenting a budget. With all the extra time to prepare the budget, why did the minister not present us with a plan for jobs and growth? Does the minister realize that his measure will benefit the wealthy and hurt Quebec? Will he help the middle class and withdraw this Hon. Ed Holder (Minister of State (Science and Technology), measure that helps only the wealthiest Canadians? CPC): Mr. Speaker, I have a few facts for the member opposite and Hon. Joe Oliver (Minister of Finance, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the for the House. tax-free savings account, or TFSA, is an excellent way for Canadians to save money to buy a house, educate their children or build a nest Both the International Monetary Fund and the OECD are egg for retirement. projecting that Canada will have the strongest economic growth in the G7 in the years ahead. In addition to that, for the seventh straight That is why 11 million Canadians have a TFSA. The vast majority year, the World Economic Forum has ranked Canada's banking of those Canadians have a low or average income. Fully 60% of the system as the soundest in the world. Our net debt to GDP ratio people who contribute the maximum amount to their TFSA earn less remains among the lowest, and organizations like Bloomberg ranked than $60,000 a year. It is incredible to think that the Liberals and the Canada as one of the most attractive places in the world to do NDP would cancel the increased TFSA contribution limit and deny business. the middle class and seniors this opportunity to save money. [English] Maybe those members should factor that in their questions. Mr. Nathan Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley, NDP): Mr. Hon. Scott Brison (Kings—Hants, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, just to be Speaker, I guess we know why the Minister of Finance could not clear for the record, that question was for the Minister of Finance to answer the question on how many jobs the budget would create. It answer. was the wrong question. The better one is this. How many jobs would this budget destroy in Canada? Today, GM has cut 1,000 jobs in Oshawa. Today, there are The Quebec government is now speaking out against the 160,000 fewer jobs for young Canadians than in 2008. The Conservatives' plan to give billions to the wealthy through a major percentage of people unemployed for over a year has doubled since expansion of the TFSA. It has warned that this scheme will drain 2008. CIBC says that the quality of Canadian jobs is at its lowest in provincial budgets by hundreds of millions of dollars and grow to 25 years. billions as the wealthy hide more and more of their money. Meanwhile, middle-class and working-class Canadians work hard With Canada's job market so weak, how can the Conservatives just to get by and will have to work even harder to pay for these pretend everything is fine, and why do they refuse to present a real giveaways to the wealthy. plan for jobs and growth? 13284 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Oral Questions Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Minister of Employment and Social Who said that? It is the NDP member for Ottawa Centre Development and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC): Mr. advocating the tax-free savings accounts. Now the New Democrats Speaker, we have a real plan: tax cuts, trade and training, which has say they want to get rid of it. Which is it? created 1.2 million net new jobs in Canada. One of those job- creating tax cuts is the reduction in the small business tax rate. [Translation]

We all know that small businesses are the major drivers of job Ms. Isabelle Morin (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, NDP): creation, but the Liberal leader announced that he would raise taxes Mr. Speaker, Conservative techniques are not working at all. The on small businesses if he ever got the chance. This is the same leader HSBC report is clear: half of all Canadians expect to continue who thinks that budgets balance themselves. Small businesses know working after they retire because they will need income. By raising better and that is why they support our government, our tax cuts, and the eligibility age for the guaranteed income supplement and OAS to ultimately they will support us in the next election. 67, the Conservatives have made the situation even more difficult. Hon. Ralph Goodale (Wascana, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the budget notwithstanding, the Canadian economy is in obvious trouble. Why is the government not implementing measures to help It shrank in January, worse than first reported. February was flat. Canadians retire with dignity? Oil and gas have tumbled. Manufacturing was supposed to pick up the slack, but it is dropping too. U.S. growth was supposed to pull Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Minister of Employment and Social Canada along, but that is not happening either. A thousand more jobs Development and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC): Mr. are gone today at GM. Thirty-five per cent of Canadian families are Speaker, here is a quote: carrying debt ratios over 200%. A Tax-Free Savings Account...can help you while you work towards your short- Why did we waste two months for a pointless budget with no plan and long-term financial goals. A TFSA is a flexible registered savings account; investment income, including capital gains, earned within the account is not taxed, for growth and not even a basic job creation target? and withdrawals are tax-free. Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC): Mr. That is the member for Ottawa Centre championing our TFSAs as Speaker, the Liberals have a one-point plan for the economy, and that a good way for our seniors to save for the future. We agree. is to raise taxes on the middle class. We learned last week from the Liberal leader that they propose to raise taxes on small businesses. *** Canadians know that budgets do not balance themselves. Hard work and discipline balanced our budget, and now we will help FOOD SAFETY families balance their budgets by reducing their taxes with a total of $6,000 in tax savings for the average family of four. We have Ms. Laurin Liu (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, NDP): Mr. Speaker, reduced taxes; the Liberals would raise them. TFSAs are giveaways for the rich, but there is nothing to help *** seniors. ● (1445) Now let us talk about food safety. After the XL Foods plant closed SENIORS in 2012 for E. coli contamination, new cases were identified. Last Ms. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP): Mr. Speak- year, American inspectors found the bacteria in beef exported by that er, a new report from HSBC shows that 60% of Canadian seniors company, and reports have shown that testing for E. coli is not done will only semi-retire or never retire at all. consistently. The reality is that more and more Canadians cannot afford to Will the Conservatives finally recognize the consequences of their retire. They have faced decades of income inequality and are cuts to food safety? consequently saddled with record levels of debt. When will the Conservatives listen to our calls for a national [English] seniors strategy and adopt the NDP's plan so all seniors, the people who built our country, can retire with dignity? Hon. Rona Ambrose (Minister of Health, CPC): Mr. Speaker, Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Minister of Employment and Social there have been absolutely no cuts to food safety. It is quite the Development and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC): Mr. opposite. There are nearly 40 Canadian Food Inspection Agency Speaker, let me share one idea that would help seniors with their inspection staff on the ground in this facility alone every day. retirement. A Tax-Free Savings Account...can help you while you work towards your short Corrective action was taken to deal with some of the issues that and long-term financial goals. A TSFA is a flexible registered savings account: happened in 2014 and before. Inspectors have resolved all the issues investment income, including capital gains, earned within the account is not taxed; and there are none outstanding. In fact, we have even created a team and withdrawals are tax-free. of inspectors to inspect the inspectors to ensure they are doing their jobs. I am going to send them in to ensure everything is okay. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13285

Oral Questions Mr. Malcolm Allen (Welland, NDP): Mr. Speaker, that is [Translation] reassuring. We have inspectors, but now we do not trust the inspectors so we will get inspectors to inspect the inspectors, just in TOURISM case. Mr. Claude Gravelle (Nickel Belt, NDP): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of State for Tourism shocked francophone communities However, it did not work because we know that Brooks continued outside Quebec when he said that they want unlimited amounts of to ship from that plant. After 2012, there were still problems. We money to meet their needs. know that tainted meat went to the United States four times last year. Instead of scorning francophones outside Quebec, he should listen As much as the minister protests that there are no cuts, she should to them. He would learn that his government's cuts are preventing check her own budget document to see that, courtesy of the Minister them from providing adequate services. There is no mention of Finance, the Conservatives have cut the budget to the CFIA. That whatsoever of francophones in the budget. is black and white. Will the minister ever understand that francophone communities There is no mention in this budget about doing anything. Why is need support, not scorn? the Conservative government abandoning families to the prospect of being ill because of tainted meat? [English] Hon. Rona Ambrose (Minister of Health, CPC): Mr. Speaker, Hon. Ed Holder (Minister of State (Science and Technology), let me read what Dr. Keith Warriner, from the University of Guelph, CPC): Mr. Speaker, our government is proud of the concrete actions said. He is a food safety expert in Canada. He said that the it has taken to support Canada's tourism industry. I might mention suggestion that meat sold in Canada was unsafe was “scare- that the tourism industry in Canada and in Quebec is booming, and mongering”. I would ask the member to stop doing exactly that. 2014 was a record year for destinations across Canada, including Quebec. In 2015, we are very confident that will continue to grow. In this plant alone we have 40 CFIA inspection staff on the ground every day. They have a rigorous system. The Conference Board of *** Canada rates our food safety system number one against all OECD countries, including the United States. They are doing an excellent [Translation] job. ABORIGINAL AFFAIRS *** Ms. Anne Minh-Thu Quach (Beauharnois—Salaberry, NDP): Mr. Speaker, many aboriginal communities, including Akwesasne in ● (1450) my riding, are worried about the impact Bill C-51 will have, and FOREIGN AFFAIRS with good reason. Mrs. Stella Ambler (Mississauga South, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I As we already know, although aboriginal people make up only was pleased to see the 10 men accused of attacking Malala 4.3% of Canada's population, they make up 23% of federal inmates. Yousafzai, back in 2012, were recently arrested in Pakistan for their Bill C-51, which is overly broad, will only increase this dispropor- barbaric acts. tionate representation in our prisons. Furthermore, public safety infrastructure on reserves is underfunded. Could the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration please update the House on the situation and Canada's response? Why is the minister so determined to ram Bill C-51 through when Hon. Chris Alexander (Minister of Citizenship and Immigra- it threatens the rights of aboriginal peoples? tion, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hard-working [English] member for Mississauga South for her work on legislation to protect women in Canada and around the world. Hon. Peter MacKay (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, CPC): Mr. Speaker, it is quite the contrary. This is a bill I am sure all members will be pleased with the news that the that is very focused. It brings forward practical, pragmatic measures perpetrators of these brutal acts against Malala Yousafzai have been that many of our law enforcement community, and, in fact, many arrested. We hope they will face the full force of Pakistan's law and Canadians and communities have been calling for to protect them. that justice will be done. This is a very serious issue. This is not some hypothetical scenario It is precisely because Malala Yousafzai was not silenced by these happening around the world or happening in Canada. These are terrorists that she has become an inspiration to all Canadians. She measures designed specifically to protect Canadians in their has become an advocate for girls' education. She has been an communities and give law enforcement and our investigative advocate for human rights and for freedom. services the ability to protect Canadians in practical ways.

On this side of the House, we are particularly proud to be It is clearly stated in the bill that this is not intended to target bestowing upon her honorary Canadian citizenship. We hope this lawful advocacy protest, dissent or artistic expression. This is a bill process will bring the terrorists to justice. that goes after terrorists, and Canadians support it. 13286 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Oral Questions [Translation] ETHICS COPYRIGHT Hon. Wayne Easter (Malpeque, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, in December 2008, the Prime Minister named 18 people to the Senate. Mr. Pierre Nantel (Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, NDP): Mr. Mike Duffy was appointed from P.E.I. despite the fact that he had Speaker, in their budget, the Conservatives want to amend the lived in Ontario for more than 40 years. The Prime Minister could Copyright Act to finally conform to international standards by have appointed Duffy from Ontario, the province where he resided, extending the term of protection of sound recordings and but instead, appointed none other than Conservative bagman and performances from 50 to 70 years. now apparently PMO coverup artist Irving Gerstein to represent Is this too good to be true? Yes, because songwriters will not be Ontario. included in this measure. Our artists and songwriters are the very source of our music, culture and heritage. Why do the partisan interests of the Conservative Party trump the Canadian Constitution, and why does the Prime Minister think he is Will the minister stand up and protect our composers and above the law? songwriters in the changes to the Copyright Act? Mr. Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Hon. Shelly Glover (Minister of Canadian Heritage and Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC): Mr. Speaker, Official Languages, CPC): Mr. Speaker, we are very proud of what I have already answered that question with respect to constitutional we have done for artists in our 2015 budget. practice.

We have had all sorts of feedback, and with the indulgence of the Having said that, of course, this is a party that fought tooth and House, I would like to quote some of it. nail when we were trying to bring accountability to the Senate. The [English] Liberal Party tried to make victims out of these senators. We are doing just the opposite. Of course, it was the Liberal Party that To start with, Graham Henderson from Music Canada said the appointed someone like disgraced senator Mac Harb, who owes the following: Canadian taxpayers $250,000. It was prime minister Trudeau who I By proposing to extend the term of copyright in recorded music, [the] Prime believe appointed the senator from Puerto Vallarta who never sat in Minister...and the Government of Canada have demonstrated a real understanding of the Senate but was happy to collect his things. I do not recall him music’s importance to the Canadian economy. doing anything about that. Of course, there was Senator Lavigne.

Randy Bachman said that the Prime Minister was “taking care of We are bringing accountability to it— business”. We will take no advice from the NDP— The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bruce Stanton): The hon. member for ● (1455) Malpeque. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bruce Stanton): The hon. member for Hon. Wayne Easter (Malpeque, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the Beaches—East York. government knows absolutely nothing about accountability. *** Is the parliamentary secretary just afraid to answer the question? CANADA POST Even Nigel Wright told the Prime Minister's lawyer that he “will not Mr. Matthew Kellway (Beaches—East York, NDP): Mr. communicate the [Prime Minister]’s view that ownership of property Speaker, mayors and councillors across this country are furious equates to residence...”. Was Wright hiding this information for good with the government's imposition of community mailboxes in the reason: because it goes against the Constitution? Is it not true that the neighbourhoods they represent. Hamilton is taking Canada Post to Prime Minister wanted Duffy as a senator because he was the golden court over the unilateral seizure of municipal property. In cities like goose of Conservative fundraising? Ottawa and Toronto, councillors are demanding to know how Why did the Prime Minister violate the Constitution for a Canada Post can possibly fit superboxes into dense urban Conservative fundraiser, and doing so wrongly? neighbourhoods without destroying green space, without causing traffic problems, without making the streets less safe for kids. Mr. Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC): Again, Mr. Why are the Conservatives forging ahead with a plan that is going Speaker, the constitutional practice on this has been clear for almost to fail our cities? 150 years, but it is awkward when that member asks a question about Hon. Lisa Raitt (Minister of Transport, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the ethics when, of course, he was one of the members who was reality is that, in 68% of Canadian households, there will be no identified as having to return living expenses. I am not sure why they change through moving to community mailboxes. Secondly, the would have him ask this question. There are other people in the Federation of Canadian Municipalities recognized this, too, when it caucus who could ask it. overwhelmingly defeated a motion that called on us to reverse Canada Post's direction in moving to community mailboxes. The member for Vancouver Centre—but she has campaign debts outstanding, so she could not ask it. Maybe the leader could have Canada Post has an obligation to be self-sufficient. This is its plan, asked it, but of course, he accepted speaking fees when he was a it is implementing it, and we expect it to do it in a sensitive way, member of Parliament, so he could not ask that question. When we taking into consideration communities' needs. go down that— April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13287

Oral Questions The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bruce Stanton): The hon. member for TAXATION Surrey North. Mr. Blake Richards (Wild Rose, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I have *** spoken to thousands of hard-working parents in my riding about their child care choices and the cost of raising a family. PUBLIC SAFETY They have expressed their strong support for our new family tax Mr. Jasbir Sandhu (Surrey North, NDP): Mr. Speaker, gang cut and enhanced universal child care benefit that will make every violence in Surrey has reached crisis levels. My community needs single family, including single parents, better off. However, they are urgent action now from the government, but instead, yesterday deeply concerned that the NDP and the Liberals would take that Conservatives stood in the House and patted themselves on the back away from them. for a job well done. Last night, the minister was backpedalling, doing damage control, but he has still refused to make any concrete Can the Minister of State for Social Development please outline commitments. It is unacceptable to me. Surrey needs more resources, how our balanced budget is providing real, tangible support to including youth gang prevention programs. middle-class families?

Will the government start immediately approving the 100 RCMP Hon. Candice Bergen (Minister of State (Social Development), officers the city of Surrey has requested? CPC): Mr. Speaker, the member for Wild Rose is correct. His constituents need to be worried about the NDP and the Liberals and ● (1500) what they would do given the chance. Ms. Roxanne James (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister We are giving benefits to every family with children in this of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, CPC): Mr. country. What the NDP does is insult families when they do not use Speaker, when it comes to gang violence, I think the member was licensed daycare, and 90% of them do not. We respect what families here yesterday when I brought forward the good news that the decide to do in terms of looking after their children. government had invested $2.8 million in crime prevention in Surrey alone. That is why we are giving every family with kids $160 for each child under the age of six, $60 for every child over the age seven, Having said that, I am very proud of our government's actions in because we believe that money belongs to Canadian families, not to tackling crime. We have actually passed more than 30 tough-on- bureaucracies, not to unions, not to government coffers. crime policies. It is only this government that stands for the protection of all Canadians. *** I would like to ask that member how many of those policies that [Translation] we passed he actually voted for. EMPLOYMENT Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims (Newton—North Delta, NDP): Mr. Speaker, there should be no more excuses and no more empty Hon. Stéphane Dion (Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, Lib.): Mr. promises. Speaker, the Conservatives' inconsistent management approach has made a terrible mess of the temporary foreign worker program. The city and the province are waiting for the government's approval for 100 new RCMP officers. The people of Surrey need After leaving this program wide open to abuse, the Conservatives more police on the streets now. They need more gang prevention and are now going to the other extreme and closing the floodgates to the drug crime prevention funding. point where employers are being denied workers they legitimately need to keep our economy going. The Quebec government and the Conservatives' self-congratulation for their failures is not going to Chambre de commerce du Québec are condemning this mess and fix the problem. The violence on our streets is real, and the have every right to seek to negotiate terms. government needs to take real action. When will the Conservatives stop hurting the economy with their Will the minister commit, here and now, to approve the new incompetence and arrogance? officers and resources, and provide clear timelines for when they will arrive? Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC): Mr. Ms. Roxanne James (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister Speaker, Quebec has known about these changes since June 2014, of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, CPC): Mr. and we have spoken with the Government of Quebec about them Speaker, of course our Conservative government has taken strong since that announcement was made. action to keep British Columbians and all Canadians safe. However, 143,000 Quebeckers have been receiving employment It is very interesting that they are standing here in the House insurance benefits this year and they need jobs. Jobs in Quebec asking for more resources when in fact this government has should be going to Quebeckers. It is shameful that the Liberal Party increased resources for the RCMP seven times, and seven times the wants to take jobs away from Quebeckers and give them to member who asked that question voted against it. temporary foreign workers. That is completely shameful. 13288 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Oral Questions [English] PUBLIC SAFETY NOTHERN DEVELOPMENT Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP): Mr. Speaker, let me parenthetically agree entirely with the member for Northwest Mr. Dennis Bevington (Northwest Territories, NDP): Mr. Territories. Canada's performance as chair of the Arctic Council was Speaker, Canada's two-year reign over the Arctic Council has been a disgrace. labelled a failure by the international community. My question is related to Bill C-51 and the 94th application of Climate change is one of the greatest threats to the north, and the time allocation. Earlier today, the government House leader made the Conservatives chose to ignore it. The United States have taken absurd claim that I had not read Bill C-51, which I assure the House I charge and declared that the Arctic Council will return to critical have studied assiduously, and I doubt that the hon. member has. issues, like the impact of Arctic climate change, the development of renewable energy, public education, monitoring ocean acidification. I would like to know if the government House leader knows the difference between oversight, review, and issuing a warrant. They Why did the government waste two years of Arctic Council time are three entirely different concepts. Bill C-51 does not contain any and spoil its efforts on the international stage? judicial oversight. Hon. Rob Nicholson (Minister of Foreign Affairs, CPC): Mr. Hon. Peter Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House Speaker, I do not know where this member has been on this file, but of Commons, CPC): Mr. Speaker, when we introduced this we have championed a program of economic development and legislation and drafted it, we had a choice. We could ask politicians environmental sustainability. after the fact to examine the activities of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service with regard to its new powers, or we could give This hon. member said something about a failure. I was at that that power to judges to examine, in advance before acts were conference. Every single permanent member there praised our undertaken, whether they were appropriate, and if they thought so, to government and the Minister of the Environment for her chairman- grant a warrant. ship of the Arctic Council. That is the choice we made. We chose to have judges review these He is the only one, and they are the only ones, who are matters rather than politicians. questioning this. Nobody else is. *** *** [Translation] ● (1505) FOREIGN AFFAIRS EMPLOYMENT Mr. Lawrence Toet (Elmwood—Transcona, CPC): Mr. Speak- Mr. Jean-François Fortin (Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Ma- er, our Conservative government, under the leadership of this Prime tane—Matapédia, FD): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Employment Minister, has been unequivocal in our support for Ukraine. should look outside and see that summer is just around the corner. It is a crucial time for many businesses that will need many workers, Whether it takes 5 months or 50 years, we will never, ever including temporary foreign workers, to operate. recognize the illegal annexation and occupation of Crimea, which is sovereign Ukrainian territory. This morning, Quebec minister Kathleen Weil criticized Ottawa's refusal to understand Quebec's needs and to modify the current Can the Minister of Foreign Affairs please update the House on criteria of the temporary foreign worker program, which will the most recent measures our government has taken to support penalize many employers and sectors of activity. Ukraine and its territorial integrity? Does the minister realize that his refusal to fix the program will Hon. Rob Nicholson (Minister of Foreign Affairs, CPC): Mr. hurt the economy and inevitably the workers he claims he is Speaker, Canada strongly condemns the actions of the combined protecting? Russian separatist forces, and we remain concerned about what appears to be Vladimir Putin's command and control of militants in Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Minister of Employment and Social occupied Ukraine. Development and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC): Mr. Speaker, 143,000 Quebeckers received employment insurance in Today, I was pleased to announce, along with the Ukrainian 2013. Employers should hire those Quebeckers instead of hiring Foreign Minister, Pavlo Klimkin, Canadian funding for a series of temporary foreign workers. Quebeckers are entitled to work in their projects to strengthen human rights and improve Ukraine's business own province. environment. We will protect this right by ensuring that employers look to hire This is in addition to Canada's significant military contribution, Quebeckers and not just temporary foreign workers. NATO's assurance packages, and the world's strongest sanctions. [English] We should make no mistake: under the leadership of this Prime The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bruce Stanton): That will bring Minister, Canada stands with Ukraine. question period to an end for today. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13289

Business of the House However, I would like to draw the attention of all hon. members to the Conservative government is doing is going to start being repaired the upcoming centenary, on May 3, 2015, of Lieutenant Colonel as of Oct 19, when an NDP government comes in and starts repairing John McCrae's iconic poem In Flanders Fields. all that the government has broken over the course of the last few years. That is good news for Canadians. McCrae, a surgeon in the Canadian Field Artillery, was in charge of a field hospital during the second battle of Ypres in 1915. His That being said, I would like to ask my hon. colleague, the friend and former student, Lieutenant Alexis Helmer, was killed in government House leader, what will be on the government's agenda the battle. It was his burial among the poppies that in part inspired in the coming week. the poem, first published anonymously in the magazine Punch. Hon. Peter Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House ● (1510) of Commons, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I admire the quality of optimism, [Translation] and I know that hope springs eternal in my colleague's breast.

Over time, the poem has come to symbolize the collective After this statement, we will complete the motion, pursuant to mourning of all Canadians in remembrance of those who, in service Standing Order 78, in relation to Bill C-51. After that, we will of their country, have made the ultimate sacrifice for all of us. consider Bill C-46, the pipeline safety act at report stage, and then [English] proceed to debate it at third reading. This bill would ensure that Canada's pipeline safety regime remains world class. That debate Hon. members may have noticed that the words of McCrae's well- will continue next week, on Wednesday. known poem are engraved in English and in French on two of the marble panels that line the walls of the Memorial Chamber. Tomorrow we will wrap up the second reading debate on Bill [Translation] C-50, the citizen voting act. The House will have an opportunity later today, I hope, to deliberate on how that will proceed. This room is a reflection of the country’s profound sense of loss following the First World War and, like the poem, it has come to [Translation] represent our nation’s immeasurable gratitude for all those who have died in service to Canada. Monday, we will conclude the report stage debate of Bill C-51, the Anti-terrorism Act, 2015. Our Conservative government takes all [English] threats to the security of Canada and Canadians very seriously. I am pleased to inform all hon. members that the Department of Veterans Affairs has given permission to modify the page-turning That is why we are moving forward with Bill C-51 and the crucial schedule of the First World War Book of Remembrance so that the provisions contained in it to protect our national security. Third page that bears the name of Lieutenant Colonel John McCrae will be reading of this important bill will take place Tuesday. displayed today, April 30. [English]

*** Thursday, before question period, we will consider Bill S-3, the PRESENCE IN GALLERY port state measures agreement implementation act at report stage, The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bruce Stanton): I would also like to and hopefully, third reading. This bill passed at second reading with take this opportunity to acknowledge members of the clan McCrae, widespread support, and I am optimistic that third reading will be no who are present today in the gallery. different. Some hon. members: Hear, hear! [Translation] *** I understand that the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities is meeting this afternoon to give [Translation] clause-by-clause consideration to Bill C-52, the Safe and Accoun- BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE table Rail Act. This bill would further strengthen Canada's rail safety Mr. Peter Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster, NDP): Mr. regime and ensure that adequate compensation is available. If the Speaker, I have bad news and good news. committee finishes that work today, we will consider the bill at report stage and third reading after question period next Thursday. The bad new is that today, the government sadly used a closure and time allocation motion for the 94th time to shut down debate on At second reading, New Democrats spoke about the importance of Bill C-51, which is a threat to our rights and freedoms. passing this bill urgently and therefore I hope that they will see to letting this legislation pass next week, so that the Senate will have The government even seems to want to move a 95th closure plenty of time to complete its consideration of the bill before the motion after question period. Unbelievable. This government will summer adjournment. not allow debate. [English] ● (1515) [English] The good news is that tomorrow is May 1. That means that there are only 170 days left in the life of the Conservative government. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bruce Stanton): The Chair has notice There are only 30 sitting days. What that means is that the damage of a question of privilege. We will proceed with that now. 13290 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Privilege PRIVILEGE Wellington Street and took one of the official shuttles of Parliament to get back to the House immediately for the vote. There were some, PHYSICAL OBSTRUCTION I want to approximate, seven or eight minutes until we were voting, Mr. Nathan Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley, NDP): Mr. which is certainly sufficient time. Speaker, I rise today on a question of privilege related to an event that took place a little earlier this afternoon as a number of my As the shuttle approached the East Block entrance to the colleagues and I were returning to the House of Commons for a vote. parliamentary precinct on Wellington Street, an officer refused to allow the shuttle to turn into the security area, leaving us in the Allow me to preface my comments by saying that as of the events middle of Wellington, in the left-hand turn lane. I am sure members of October last year, and the constant reminders, our admiration and are familiar with it. respect for the security forces that govern and protect us on Parliament Hill is consistent for me and my colleagues on the New MPs from both sides of the House, Conservatives and New Democrat benches and all members of the House. We commend Democrats, particularly my Conservative colleagues, I should say, them for their work and for their constant courage. They have a from my recollection, raised their concern about the need to proceed difficult task. They maintain access for the public to this institution, to the House immediately. The time was approaching perhaps five this House of Commons, and to all of the parliamentary buildings. minutes before the vote was to take place. They raised their concern They have to maintain an incredibly high level of security, given the and asked the driver to allow us, if we could not turn into the world we live in. They also must maintain, as is ordered by this parliamentary precinct, to at least disembark from the bus. House and our constitution, access for all members of Parliament to Not surprisingly, though, the driver of the bus was unable to do so, the House of Commons in order for us to fulfill our duties on behalf because we were in the middle of Wellington Street, and that would of Canadians. have been entirely unsafe for all members, and we were denied that Today, however, I, and others, was blocked from accessing the permission, which was of course right. parliamentary precinct by an officer of the RCMP. The physical We then asked the driver, some of my Conservative colleagues, to obstruction impeded me from performing my parliamentary duties, drive onto the sidewalk portion. For those who are familiar with the which I believe constitutes a prima facie breach of my privilege as a parliamentary precinct, there is a small buttress before one hits the member of this House. gate where the RCMP member was standing and denying access. I will remind the House that this a matter that concerns all The driver also indicated that this was not possible. It was not members of Parliament, and there were, in fact, Conservative permitted by the security conditions of the House, and the RCMP members of Parliament on the bus who shared my concern about the was not allowing that option either. We were literally not stuck in actions that took place and our inability to return to the House, traffic but stuck in the middle of the road, unable to proceed onto because as members will know, today we had a number of votes. The Parliament Hill. votes we were returning to were taking place a few short minutes This is, I presume, part of some security protocol that was going from the moment we were stopped from entering the gate onto on at the time, but that was not explained to us when we eventually Parliament Hill. were able to pass through. Erskine May's Treatise on The Law, Privileges, Proceedings and The RCMP officer signalled to our driver, and then through him to Usage of Parliament defines “privilege” in the following way, on us, that it would be another three to five minutes before he would page 75: allow us to proceed in the shuttle. Parliamentary privilege is the sum of the peculiar rights enjoyed by each House ● (1520) collectively...and by Members of each House individually, without which they could not discharge their functions.... As members can imagine, this caused a certain amount of consternation among me and my colleagues, more so from my We take this, of course, very seriously. It is the foundation of our Conservative friends because every minute as the bells are ringing democratic principles in this place. and time is ticking down is a precious one. When the votes Let me explain what happened. I think that will set the ground for commence they are not done again if someone is unable to attend, a ruling perhaps later today or in the future. once a vote is taken. Earlier today I was denied reasonable, timely access to the We were not told what reason led to the officer denying us access parliamentary precinct by an officer of the force. At the time, I was to the parliamentary precinct, but many other MPs were on the coming to the House of Commons to attend a vote to adjourn the shuttle with me. The member for London—Fanshawe, whose office House of Commons. is in the Valour Building, was also on that shuttle, trying to make every effort to get to the vote and perform her duties. Members can When the bells started ringing for the vote, I was in the Valour check this against their own memories, but I am almost certain that Building for a meeting of the Standing Committee on Finance. I was the member for North Vancouver and the member for South Shore— chairing the meeting at the time. We had remained with a number of St. Margaret's were also on the bus, as well as one other colleague, MPs to entertain the witnesses we had who were discussing the whose name I am misplacing right now, from the Conservative important issue of terror financing. Once the committee adjourned its caucus. I am sure if they seek it, they would have an opportunity to meeting, with sufficient time to return to the House so that all intervene in this debate because, as I have said a few times, they members could make it in a reasonable time, I went outside onto showed a certain amount of consternation. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13291

Privilege At one point, one of my Conservative colleagues said that if this happen again, that things would improve and certain measures were were a confidence vote the government could fall and this is made, but clearly not enough. unacceptable. While it was not a vote of confidence, we have had confidence votes in this place that have been decided by one or two votes on one side of the House. We all remember our dear departed We must remind the House that some people will ask what it friend, Mr. Cadman, who cast a vote in this House on a motion of matters if an MP is unable to return back to vote. We on this side confidence and that night in the House of Commons the government believe that right and privilege is the central tenet of how a was to fall or continue based on that one singular vote. democracy functions, that members must absolutely be able to return and vote at the earliest possible convenience and cannot be barred There are a number of precedents for this. As members know, the from entering the House to vote. second edition of the House of Commons Procedure and Practice says on page 110: In circumstances where Members claim to be physically obstructed, impeded, ● (1525) interfered with or intimidated in the performance of their parliamentary functions, the Speaker is apt to find a prima facie breach of privilege has occurred. Incidents involving physical obstruction—such as traffic barriers, security Let us again remember the scenarios. It may not mean much to cordons and union picket lines either impeding Members' access to the Parliamentary members today because many votes are decided not beforehand, but Precinct or blocking their free movement within the precinct—as well as occurrences there is a majority in the government right now and the of physical assault or molestation have been found to be prima facie cases of privilege. Conservatives are able to cast ballots and win the vast majority of those votes. However, it was not that long ago that we were in To reiterate, security cordons, traffic barriers or any kind of picket minority parliaments, and we may return to them again in the future, line would all qualify as reasons why we would find a prima facie in which every single vote that is cast has a contributing factor to the case of a breach of privilege. outcome, either on the passage or the denial of a bill, or in the very sustaining of a government or having that government fall and have The second edition of Parliamentary Privilege in Canada by Canadians return to an election. Joseph Maingot states on page 230, “Members are entitled to go about their parliamentary business undisturbed”. Members have experienced this on the grounds typically as they I raise this question in the context of the larger issue that has approach a security cordon or any of the entrances to the House of previously been raised in the House of Commons, which is Commons that many conduct ourselves with our parliamentary pins becoming increasingly relevant following the adoption of a motion or a ring or some indication. However, that of course is not the rule. that the Conservatives pushed through, under closure I might add, The security precinct is also required to be able to identify us as we related to the general security of the parliamentary precinct. This come in. As I look around the House today, I see that members on motion instructed both Speakers of Parliament to invite the RCMP to both sides, including me, do not carry our pins at all times. lead all operational security throughout the parliamentary precinct Identification is paramount to allow us to enter. I notice the Leader of and the grounds around Parliament Hill. the Government in the House of Commons missed his pin today, but he of course has free and unobstructed access to the House and is granted that permission every time he comes in. Mr. Speaker, jurisdiction is no longer clear. I refer to the fact that although the Speaker of the House of Commons and the Speaker of In fact, this is not the first time we have raised this matter. Every the Senate are in fact masters of the parliamentary precinct, you will time, we are told again and again by the establishment that the matter then be forced to delegate the authority for all operations, will be looked into, yet we see little or no improvement. Examples of maintenance and security to the RCMP, to PWGSC and other prima facie cases of breach of privilege abound. I will remind the agencies. Let me remind you that in the case of our security forces, House of Speaker's rulings in similar instances. we have been put in the situation, not by negotiations reached by all parties, which has been the tradition of the House of Commons here, The first occurred on March 15, 2012 when, during the visit of a the House of Commons in England, and virtually every parliamen- head of state, members who were not carrying their identification tary precinct that has a functioning democracy, that when speaking with them—not just the pin but some form of picture ID—were of issues of security the best and really the only good solution is barred from accessing Parliament Hill by the security forces. arrived at by all members of the House because there is no partisan The second happened again basically two years later on interest, there is no vote to be gained, there is no advantage to be September 25, 2014 when the member for Acadie—Bathurst was taken by having one security version over another. However, that delayed in accessing Parliament Hill by a similar roadblock set up to was not done here. A motion was pushed through the House under allow the motorcade of the then president of Germany to pass. The closure to come to the situation that we are in right now. obstruction again occurred while bells were ringing for a vote on time allocation presented by the Conservative government of the I believe this contradicts the second edition of the House of time, and the member was nearly denied his right to vote. Commons Procedure and Practice on page 323, which states: In both of these previous cases, Mr. Speaker, you ruled that these instances were prima facie breaches of privilege. The House was One of the fundamental privileges of the House is to regulate its own internal returned with the message that those things, in both cases, would not affairs, exercising exclusive jurisdiction over its premises and the people within. 13292 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Privilege Let me remind us of that statement, that our own guidelines, the votes yet to come this afternoon. I am sure that my colleague would instructions that we have to follow as parliamentarians, instruct us not want to miss those by unduly delaying the process that is that the masters of our fate must be guided here. That includes issues currently under way to allow such a vote to occur. regarding security. They cannot be outsourced or given over to another. The function of Parliament is unique, as are the functions of any other part of government. The free and fair access to voting, and I will not make additional comment at this point in time, but I the security systems that are informed by the members who are here believe that it needs further comment. We have heard from the are exclusive to here. The government has chosen a different path RCMP on two occasions already in the procedures and House affairs that we think is a precarious one. committee. We have expressed our dissatisfaction with the operation of the RCMP from time to time. We have met with the Assistant I also refer the House to page 170 of Parliamentary Privilege in Commissioner who is responsible for security and the last time we Canada by Mr. Maingot, which states: met with the Commissioner of the RCMP. ...the House of Commons is not a department of the government of Canada but exists as a constituent element of Parliament. Mr. Speaker, I would suggest to you that, with your guidance and He goes on further to say: permission, the government will come back with a more detailed Each House of Parliament is entitled to the administration of affairs within its assessment of exactly what occurred this afternoon and present our own precincts free from interference.... Control of the accommodation and services position at that time. However, I do want to encourage all members within the Parliament Buildings is therefore vested in the Speakers— to observe brevity this afternoon so that we can continue with the You, the Speaker of the House: votes that the member opposite so graphically pointed out are ...on behalf of their respective Houses. Thus Public Works and Government important to all members of this House. Services and other government departments act only on the advice of officials of each House. I will be making further submissions in due course. Therefore, in our rules and guidelines around parliamentary function it clearly states that the design of security and the function Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP): Mr. Speaker, of this House is guided by who we elect to the Speaker's office, both I am very troubled by the events related by the hon. member for here and in the Senate. It cannot be sourced out. This is not some Skeena—Bulkley Valley, but I must say that I am not at all surprised. department and it cannot be controlled by the government of the day, The level of interference around the House of Commons in the regardless of what the Conservatives are trying to do. Parliamentary Precinct by RCMP officers has markedly increased to my direct observation. Mr. Speaker, I think you would be the first to agree that all members of Parliament are equal in their privileges in this House and no member should be interfered with or disadvantaged in any way in I have actually had RCMP officers tell me as I go through security accessing the Hill to conduct his or her duties as a member of clearance that even though they recognize me, they demand to see a Parliament. I could only imagine that, if a group of government pass. Now this is rather unusual. As the member mentioned, the members were denied access to a vote that they sought to win and parliamentary pin was supposed to be accessed. they lost that vote because a certain number of members were kept at a security cordon, this exact same privilege being raised by my The House of Commons security guards inside this place, as we friends would cut across all partisan interests because our central all know, are extraordinary and know us all on sight. The RCMP interest is to allow us to do our democratic duties. appear to go through a rapid cycling through new people all the time. ● (1530) I suppose they recognize the Prime Minister, I would hope so, but I Mr. Speaker, I would ask you to consider my question of privilege do not think they know anyone else on sight. As I was told by an and the facts I just related. I believe you will find that my privilege RCMP officer, even if they do, they think they have to see a pass. was breached and that I was prevented from carrying out my functions as an elected member of the House of Commons. If you There is a real problem around this place. I know we have find that there was a prima facie breach of my privileges as a important votes. Of course, on the subject matter of votes being time member, I am prepared to move the appropriate motion. allocation, I do not think that these matters of time allocation should Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of be coming before us at all. the Government in the House of Commons, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I listened to my colleague's words very carefully and I must say that, However, I do agree that we want to be able to be present for all being a member of the procedure and House affairs committee, if important votes, and every vote is important. Impeding access to this you find that there is a prima facie case of privilege in this instance, place by being encircled by RCMP who have now, in an it will be the third time that our committee has dealt with this very unconstitutional fashion, been placed in charge of Hill security is a issue about access to the Hill. real problem. I do not in any way, shape or form want to try and suggest that this is not an important issue, because it is. However, I note with great Ms. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP): Mr. Speak- interest that while the member very eloquently pointed out that he er, I would like to add my voice to the concerns expressed by the was almost prevented from attending a very important vote, we have member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13293

Privilege I was indeed on the same parliamentary bus trying to make my House of Commons suggest that somehow there was going to be way to the House of Commons for a very important vote. I am sure games played with this in terms of the vote, notwithstanding that the you can imagine, Mr. Speaker, how upsetting it was to be stranded in vote is on something that we consider to be very important and we the middle of Wellington Street, unable to disembark, prevented are trying to do everything we can to stop it from passing or being from moving to the security area and denied access to the House of introduced. We are fighting back as hard as we can, but it only takes Commons. 50 minutes to conclude the balance of the discussion and have a vote. There is no way this is going to go longer, so I am disappointed I wish to remind the members present that I, like every member the member would suggest that. here, have an obligation to my constituents, the people of London— Fanshawe, to uphold their right to expression through my vote. My parliamentary privileges were jeopardized, because my access to the Mr. Speaker, I realize you have an opportunity to deliberate and House was denied, and consequently the rights of my constituents decide whether or not you are going to send this matter to PROC. We were not respected. This obstruction is absolutely unacceptable. would hope you would do it right away. I would hope that given the fact that there is nothing more important than voting and that we I wish to underscore the concerns of my colleague for Skeena— have to get here to do it, that anything that impedes any member Bulkley Valley in reminding you, Mr. Speaker, that we in this from getting here is treated as a priority. Parliament have been put in this situation, not by negotiations agreed to by all parties, but by a simple motion written by the government, without consultation with other parties, and rammed through by a Mr. Speaker, I would hope that you would consider standing and vote of the Conservative majority. immediately sending this matter to PROC. It is a crucial issue. It is complex. There are security issues beyond that affect a member's This is clearly yet another example of the tyranny of the current ability to move around in terms of guests and other such things. Conservative majority. It is not democratic. It is not acceptable. However, the notion that we do not have a system that works is not acceptable. I do not like the idea, and the chair of PROC is probably Therefore, I ask, Mr. Speaker, that you ensure the free movement thinking “here we go again”, but the fact of the matter is, here we go of members of Parliament within the Parliamentary Precinct. It is again and we are going to stay on this until we get it resolved, absolutely essential if we are to have any semblance of democracy in because it is a priority. this place again. ● (1535) Again, Mr. Speaker, I hope you will send it immediately to PROC. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I Let us deal with this. We cannot continue to have this problem sit on the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs and coming up over and over again. It needs to be treated as the priority the issue of access to the parliamentary precinct is of the utmost that it is. importance. We all represent constituents and we all have a mandate to serve. The importance of being able to have that accessibility to ● (1540) the parliamentary precinct as a whole, which goes beyond the chamber itself, is of critical importance. Being able to be present for votes is also very important. Hon. Mauril Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I wish to indicate my support for the recommendation that you just I would like to highlight that if we are going to err, it is better that received, that the Standing Committee on Procedure and House we err on the side of caution and recognize that we have had a Affairs be asked to deal with this matter. couple of members stand in their place this afternoon to indicate that they felt their privilege was breached. To that extent, I would suggest You may recall, Mr. Speaker, when the motion to make the RCMP that there is merit for this matter to go to the procedure and House the lead agency to take care of security both inside and outside the affairs committee. I know that PROC is busy nowadays with the House and on Parliament Hill was made, I raised an issue and made windup of other issues in this session, but the seriousness of the issue a suggestion in writing to the government that it should follow a at hand indicates that it does merit review. This is no reflection model we have in British Columbia, where if it it is the RCMP that whatsoever on the professionalism of the RCMP, our security staff, does this, they still have to go through the provincial authorities. or even the green shuttle bus driver, who I suspect is just following Also, in the model in London, England, the city police do it, but they instructions. It is not safe for all those on the bus and others to just let still have to go through parliamentary authorities. Even the people out in the middle of a street. government whip who was proposing the motion agreed with that. We recognize the high sense of professionalism and would suggest to the chair that if we are going to err, let us err on the right Given what has happened today, it would be important that side of this issue and allow it to go to PROC where it can be properly parliamentarians deal with this issue so that the Speaker of the House looked at. and the Speaker of the Senate could have the input of parliamentar- Mr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP): Mr. ians in dealing with a very important matter. I totally agree that the Speaker, I am also a member of PROC and was part of the most significant thing we have to do here is cast a vote and if we are deliberations in the previous two cases. I have to say, and there is an prohibited from coming here, for reasons that may be valid, we still opportunity for correction, that I was disappointed to hear the need to figure out a solution, and parliamentarians should be Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the involved in reaching that solution. 13294 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Privilege The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bruce Stanton): Before we take ● (1545) further interventions on this question of privilege, it occurs to me The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bruce Stanton): On the question that that the points raised by the hon. member for Skeena—Bulkley the hon. member for Burnaby—New Westminster raises and others Valley and other hon. members have covered the impediment to have mentioned as well, at least one other hon. member who has access to the House in a very detailed and concerted way. I am participated in this question of privilege has indicated the wish to mindful that these types of exchanges on questions of privilege can address the House at a later time. I do not expect we are going to be sometimes give rise to an expanded commentary pulling in other getting to an immediate decision this afternoon, but of course we will issues. I am sure that is not intended, but it can sometimes occur. be taking these matters under advisement. I see there are two other hon. members rising on this question of The hon. member for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles. privilege. If they have anything additional to say to help our [Translation] consideration of this particular question, that would be helpful. Mrs. Anne-Marie Day (Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, However, if it is something that has already been essentially NDP): Mr. Speaker, let me bring something new to this debate. I will presented here in the House by other hon. members, we do have not raise the same issue. In my case, this is the second time my right other business in front of the House this afternoon that we will need of access to the House was violated. This did not happen today, but to get to. Therefore, I would encourage hon. members if they have on Wednesday. additional comments, by all means we will hear those, but if it is something that has been covered already, perhaps they could look to Some temporary barriers were set up where we enter the House the expediency of the work of the House here this afternoon so we when we take the bus from the Valour Building. These barriers are can get on with the work ahead. rusty and the piping is broken, so we no longer go up and down the way we are supposed to. On Wednesday, when we were not going to The hon. member for Burnaby—New Westminster. the House, but to our caucus meeting, we had the same problem and Mr. Peter Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster, NDP): Mr. the bus was full. The RCMP refused to let us enter after the bus did Speaker, the issue of impeding the vote, obstruction, is a slam dunk the whole tour and came back to try to enter. We had to go back in terms of the issue of privilege. There is no doubt there. There is through the official barriers, which made everyone late, and we were also the question of debate, which is equally important in the life of a pressed for time. parliamentarian. We saw today the government imposing closure for The time before that, it happened to the hon. member for Acadie a 94th and now 95th time, shutting down debate. These are two —Bathurst. issues that are linked to a certain extent. [English] The reality is we have what is a very clear breach of privilege. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bruce Stanton): The hon. member for There is no doubt. The member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley cited Burnaby—New Westminster on an additional point. House of Commons Procedure and Practice, page 108, certain Mr. Peter Julian: Mr. Speaker, you spoke after I finished members claiming to be physically obstructed. There is a clear case speaking and I would just like to come back to your point. of breach of privilege. You said that there is a member who wants to be heard on this What we have from the member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley is an issue. The parliamentary secretary to the government House leader offer to bring forward the appropriate motion to the House. You have has said that this is a breach of privilege. He agrees with us on this. said, Mr. Speaker, that there are other issues that are related to that, Certainly, Mr. Speaker, you could allow the member for Skeena— but we would submit that you can rule immediately on this, that this Bulkley Valley to move the appropriate motion and members who is very clearly a case of breach of privilege. It very clearly should want to contribute at that time, including the one member that you lead to a motion in the House and then referral to PROC. You have were speaking of, and I am not sure who it is, would have the ability the ability to make that ruling now. The member can then move that to intervene in the House of Commons and speak to the motion. motion and there may be a little further discussion, but it would allow, after the appropriate motion, referral to PROC. That in no way reduces what we think is the imperative, obviously agreed to by the parliamentary secretary to the government House This is a growing problem. As a couple of other members have leader, that now is the time to move that motion on breach of touched on, it had been aggravated by the government unilaterally privilege. That would allow us to have those discussions and pushing aside the Speaker's authority and House of Commons subsequent to that, if the House is in agreement, move it to the privilege a few weeks ago with the motion it dumped on the House. I procedure and House affairs committee. think all of us were willing to see what the results were. We are Hon. Peter Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House seeing increasingly that breaching of privilege of members on both of Commons, CPC): Mr. Speaker, very briefly, the parliamentary sides of the House. secretary to the government House leader indicated that the government would return having assessed facts. This is a growing problem. It is not a problem that is going away, not a problem that is being dealt with. It is a growing problem. That We have had a previous occasion where an identical question of is why I would like to suggest that you make an immediate ruling, privilege has been raised. When the facts were provided, the member Mr. Speaker, and have the member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley withdrew those facts. For that reason, it makes sense for the House to move the motion immediately. have an opportunity to hear those facts before deliberating on this. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13295

Government Orders The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bruce Stanton): I thank all hon. there is no ambiguity. Certainly, there are some good measures in the members for their interventions on this question. Of course, it is bill. important to the House to ensure these matters are taken up in due course. If the member checks the blues, I believe she will see that she said that there had not been any debate, which is not the fact. I was We acknowledge the fact that the hon. parliamentary secretary to looking at what my colleague from Toronto—Danforth said. He said, the government House leader noted, as is the customary practice “The new mechanism that would allow the Minister of Citizenship with questions of privilege, they would have the opportunity to come and Immigration to allow Elections Canada access to the non-citizen back and address the House at a later time. Of course, we will take database that CIC has would be great”. this matter under advisement and get back to the House in due course. Therefore, we have already seen some agreement from the opposition that there are elements of the bill that are positive. I hope that debate can happen at committee in due course so we can ensure that this bill and its provisions comes into force prior to the next GOVERNMENT ORDERS election. [English] Mr. Craig Scott (Toronto—Danforth, NDP): Mr. Speaker, with respect, the fact that a member of Parliament agrees with part of a CITIZEN VOTING ACT bill, while at the same time taking care to outline a number of serious BILL C-50—TIME ALLOCATION MOTION problems with the bill that need more exposure, including through The House resumed consideration of the motion. debate, is hardly an argument for shutting down debate. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bruce Stanton): There are 21 minutes The second thing I would like to reference, and ask my colleague remaining in the question period on the motion before the House. to comment on, is that all of this started in December when the minister tabled the bill and presented media and press release The hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands. materials that gave the impression this was in response to the Frank ● (1550) judgment in the court system, which prohibited preventing any Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP): Mr. Speaker, Canadian abroad from voting. The current rule in the Canada we are now looking at the 95th occasion of time allocation, and this Elections Act says that if one has been away for more than five time on Bill C-50, which would amend the Canada Elections Act years, one cannot vote, but that rule was struck down on the basis of particularly to deal with Canadians who are overseas. the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The only action the government had to take on that was simply to eliminate the rule. Nothing had to I appeal to the minister that this is a bill that we have not had any change. opportunity to debate before this House. We have not had an opportunity for members of Parliament such as me who represent a There are already a bunch of rules in the act for how those who smaller party to participate. The Green Party has two members in have been away for less than five years to vote from abroad. There is this place and it takes a great deal of time in debate for the debate no nexus whatsoever between this bill and respecting the Frank slots to come around to an opportunity to allow members such as me judgment. Rather, it is the exact opposite, because the Frank to debate the bill. judgment opens up the field of voting for citizens abroad to far more people than had been the case before. The government, obviously, I acknowledge the bill was tabled some time ago, but nothing has suddenly became worried and created much more onerous rules for happened for some months and now we are being told we must have voting from abroad for everybody, including for those who have time allocation to limit debate. I find this egregious. I regret that it is always had the right—who have been away for less than five years. a particular minister who must defend this. It is obviously the government House leader and decisions made in the PMO that have I would kindly ask my colleague across the way not to buy into decided to break all historical precedent with the number of times we the minister's spin that the bill would implement the Frank judgment. have had time allocation. However, it does particularly prejudice It does not at all. members of Parliament in my situation, and I would urge the minister to step back from this time allocation and allow us to have ● (1555) full debate on this important piece of legislation. Hon. Michelle Rempel: Mr. Speaker, it actually addresses some Hon. Michelle Rempel (Minister of State (Western Economic of the questions that are raised by the Frank judgment, which is what Diversification), CPC): Mr. Speaker, I commend my colleague we do as legislators. We look at the results of rulings, our different opposite for her interest in this important bill and her desire to take policy opinions and we come forward with legislative solutions to part in the debate, which can certainly happen at committee where deal with such things. we hear testimony from witnesses. In this case, there are some issues that are raised by the ruling. For This bill was propagated in part by the Frank ruling that took example, how do we deal with electors living abroad in terms of place in May 2014, which has a significant impact on who is eligible which riding they would vote in? In Canada, one has to show proof to vote, when and in what situations with regard to overseas voting. of residency in a certain riding, if one is a resident of Canada and Due to that, it is incumbent upon the House to take forward living in Canada, in order to vote there. That is a connection with the legislation prior to the next election so these rules can be clear and local MP. 13296 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Government Orders We have had so many chats in this place, especially through the Hon. Michelle Rempel: Mr. Speaker, there were so many things Reform Act, with regard to how we strengthen democracy. That in that intervention. I fundamentally disagree with my colleague connection with one's local MP is a very important part of that. One opposite that it is unreasonable for someone who has been living of the things the bill addresses is how we would ensure that those abroad for five years to provide proof of residency in a certain riding. living overseas, those people who are caught under the Frank ruling, Again, going back to that fundamental concept of a connection to the would have a proven link to their riding. Therefore, there are MP and the riding, when people cast their ballots, they cast them for measures in the bill which deal with that. a candidate. This is something my colleagues rose in debate and supported with the Reform Act, which the Ottawa media has talked We also have measures in the bill which deal with things such as about and celebrated quite a bit. could a ballot be sent to the wrong address? If somebody is getting registered in perpetuity, can we change that so we ensure ballots are If we are to debate and enshrine that principle, then it would make not sent in the wrong direction? The bill deals with those sorts of sense that a potentially large group of people, who have lived abroad practical things. for numerous years, would also fall under that same umbrella. It is really a question of what the Frank ruling means. To us it means that, while this decision has been made, we certainly have to As outlined in this bill, requiring those folks to show proof of address the realities that it has presented to us, and there are several residency, which could be done through an attestation, is entirely very good measures in the bill that would do that. reasonable. The bill would do that. I also think the committee will hear some good witness testimony. My colleague will have an opportunity to continue this line of debate When we have had other democratic reform measures come in that forum. before the House, we have looked at ways to ensure that we can show proof of residence, show proof of identity, have all of those Mr. Scott Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Wind- good things enshrined, while also ensuring the voter is made aware sor, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, as I have just arrived in the House, I hope I of how to do that. That, of course, is the role of Elections Canada, do not sound too repetitive after my colleague from Toronto— that education on how to vote. Danforth. From Bill C-23 to this bill, Bill C-50, there has been an overall Should these provisions come into force, I would assume that theme. The overarching theme here concentrates on issues and Elections Canada officials would work to ensure there would be problems that are overblown. We have used this expression before appropriate education materials in terms of timing and how with the prior legislation, and now with this legislation as well, attestations could be made, how proof of residence could be shown. which is that in many cases the Conservatives are cruising for a solution to a problem that does not exist. It is a bit of a false argument to say that somehow this is a disenfranchisement, because there is a very clear procedure with The Conservatives do not want people to be shopping ridings broad forms of identification, as well as a clear process for when they are living internationally, choosing any riding they wish. attestations, I really do not think this is a disenfranchisement at all. To a certain degree, I understand that concept. However, by doing this, it is making it very hard on individuals to go back to the prior addresses. In many cases, some of them are students and unable to However, we do want to ensure that these provisions, should they do that. Not only that, but the vouching process or the attestations come into force do so quickly. I would urge my colleague to push have to be done in that prior riding, which may be impossible. That this bill to committee for review. could be many years prior. ● (1600) These problems created by the Conservatives are fundamentally keeping people from their charter right to vote. It is their right. That Mr. Craig Scott: Mr. Speaker, one of the concerns I continue to is why my colleague was correct in saying that this did not address have is the false impression being left by the government in general, the judgment from the court and therefore has to be remedied. with the current minister having to carry the can, apparently. I will not go further than to say that she is responding to questions and In addition, there are the time constraints on this, time constraints others are not. within the legislation itself and time constraints regarding the enactment of the legislation. This is a strange 30-minute debate, The first thing is that a distinct impression was intended to be left. because we are talking about time allocation as well. I will not get That is a very awkward way of putting it, but back in December, for into that too much. two weeks we were all under the impression that the government had I am getting into the bona fides of the bill, because I will not have decided not to appeal the Frank case. The whole presentation of Bill that opportunity too much longer. Therefore, we should look at that. C-50 was that we needed this to implement the Frank decision as if I know the debate will continue soon. we were complying. It was a constitutional judgment, the government realized it did not stand any hope of winning an appeal, Is there not a great concern about the timeliness of this, about the so it would no longer fight against enfranchising all these Canadians full debate, as to allow people, even if they live internationally, that who had, before now, been disenfranchised, and it would not appeal. fundamental right to vote, as given to them under the Charter of That turned out to be totally false. Once we started probing, the Rights and Freedoms? government case continued. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13297

Government Orders There is no actual interest on the part of the government in for special balloting. I have friends and colleagues who live outside enfranchising Canadians, and that should inform how we understand the country for a greater period of time. They are the snowbird type what it is trying to do with this bill. When it is forced by the courts to folks who we all know. When they go abroad and an election is abide by the Frank judgment, this is how it is going to do it, and it is called, they can register for a special ballot, which comes to them. going to do it in a way that makes it exceedingly difficult when There is already a procedure to deal with folks who are living compared to what the process used to be for citizens abroad. abroad. Therefore, it is reasonable, since there are Canadian residents who perhaps have not been gone for that long a period and who It has to be put on the record that the government is appealing the already prescribe to a process like this, that it could certainly work Frank decision. That is part and parcel of why it is seeking to make it for folks who fall under the category outlined in the Frank ruling. more difficult for Canadians to vote through this new bill, and why the government does not want a lot of debate or awareness about the bill at all. The second thing is that our colleague has made a very good effort When we talk about streamlining, this is not reinventing the to present it in a way that suggests that some streamlining is going wheel. This is about saying that we have a precedent on how to deal on here. The presentation is that a bunch of rules are being cleaned with this special balloting, so why would we not make that up and the Frank judgment has kind of spurred that analysis of how consistent for those who fall under this ruling? to make the process of citizens voting from abroad more efficient, secure, fair and everything else. The fact is that of the three or four major changes, the single biggest change in the bill is that those who are abroad cannot begin the process of voting until after the writ The form and substance of the bill is to provide clarity and drops. Only at that point are they allowed to register. Then there is a consistency in how we deal with voters who are abroad during a whole series of steps involving the mail across the globe, which federal election. creates the huge risk that they will never get the vote at all. Therefore, the streamlining subtext of this is absolutely inaccurate.

It is really important to know that both of the points I have made ● (1605) about the Frank judgment, and what is going on with the judgment with respect to my last point, speak to why the government delayed so long in bringing it back for debate: because of the attention it would continue to generate. It now wants almost no attention, which Mr. Scott Simms: Mr. Speaker, it is also a question of practicality is tied to the fact that the bill is set down for debate tomorrow, in this particular case. Uniformity across this country, yes, I get that, Friday, the day when the least attention is paid to bills in the House. but for example, the international list worked really well. Many people, once they go abroad, are able to use their past addresses, if Hon. Michelle Rempel: Mr. Speaker, to set the context for my they so chose, and get on that international list, which made it response to this question, I want to make it clear for people watching functional for them to be involved in elections. The reason, of this debate that when my colleague says Canadians cannot vote, I course, is what she just mentioned. It takes long enough in this want to really ensure they understand what the context of the Frank country to request a special ballot, receive a special ballot, vote, and ruling is. send back the special ballot. For a snowbird who is in Greece, it is a In May, 2014, this decision through the Ontario Superior Court little much. struck down the law preventing citizens from voting if they had been out of the country for more than five consecutive years and had no intention of returning. That is the group of folks we are dealing with in this ruling. I want to make that perfectly clear for those who are The practicality of it is something that is not being addressed. I listening. think all of the concerns brought up by the Chief Electoral Officer will certainly be addressed over the next little while. The other In terms of the appeal of that decision, yes, our government has concern is about the respect of the courts. If that were the case, we said that we will continue with the appeal, but we have also been would not have been discussing all of these court challenges for the very clear about that all along in this debate. Therefore, I disagree past little while. The term “court tested” has now become a national with my colleague's assertion that somehow this fact has been term that everyone knows about. Is it Supreme Court tested? We do hidden. not know. As well, the government does not seem to know beforehand, and then we get into the courts and go through this Part of the role of government is to take positions on certain again. policies, which we have in the appeal of this decision, and deal with the reality that court decisions provide. Because of this decision, there are certain ambiguities that need to be tightened up in our legislation, which is why this bill was presented. There is no reason why both of these things cannot happen at the same time. Then, of course, as my colleague pointed out, we expect legislation and compliance, which is not particularly the case. It is With regard to the member's particular point about the time to in line with the system that exists in this country, but is not practical register, I would note that right now in Canada, we have a process for people outside of the country. 13298 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Government Orders Hon. Michelle Rempel: First, Mr. Speaker, in my speech last time Aglukkaq Albas Albrecht Alexander on this bill, I noted that I went to the Canada Post website, which Allen (Tobique—Mactaquac) Allison stated that it takes four to seven business days for international Ambler Ambrose Anders Anderson ballots to reach their destinations. If we look at the ways people can Armstrong Aspin register to vote, especially in a special ballot situation—and this Barlow Bateman would be a similar procedure—we see they can register by mail, Bergen Bezan Block Boughen online, at embassies, by fax. There are numerous ways in which Braid Breitkreuz people can register and get this information back and forth. Because Brown (Leeds—Grenville) Brown (Newmarket—Aurora) Butt Calandra there are folks who take advantage of the system that is in place Calkins Cannan already, it is reasonable to suggest that we could apply it to a group Carmichael Carrie of people who are potentially in the exact same situation. Chisu Chong Clarke Crockatt Daniel Dechert I think this is reasonable. Again, if we can ensure we have the Devolin Dreeshen right processes in place to advertise that process and to teach voters Dykstra Eglinski Falk Fantino how to vote, we are probably in a good situation to ensure that takes Fast Findlay (Delta—Richmond East) place. Finley (Haldimand—Norfolk) Fletcher Galipeau Gallant I will say this in closing. My colleague brings up “court tested”, Gill Glover Goguen Goldring and certainly the courts have a very important role in our Gourde Harris (Cariboo—Prince George) government system, but the legislature also has the ability and Hawn Hayes Hillyer Hoback responsibility to put forward legislation, and I do not believe in the Holder James assertion, which I think is a very dangerous thing to say, that Kamp (Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission) Keddy (South Shore—St. Margaret's) everything we do and say has to first be put forward by a court, Kent Kerr Komarnicki Kramp (Prince Edward—Hastings) because our responsibility as legislators is to put forward policy and Lake Lauzon legislate upon that. Leef Lemieux Leung Lizon ● (1610) Lobb Lukiwski Lunney MacKay (Central Nova) [Translation] MacKenzie Maguire Mayes McColeman The Deputy Speaker: Order. It is my duty to interrupt the McLeod Menegakis proceedings and put forthwith the question necessary to dispose of Miller Moore (Fundy Royal) Nicholson Norlock the motion now before the House. Obhrai Oliver [English] O'Neill Gordon Opitz O'Toole Paradis Payne Perkins The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to Poilievre Preston adopt the motion? Raitt Reid Rempel Richards Rickford Ritz Some hon. members: Agreed. Saxton Schellenberger Seeback Shea Some hon. members: No. Shipley Shory Sopuck Sorenson The Deputy Speaker: All those in favour of the motion will Stanton Strahl Sweet Tilson please say yea. Toet Trost Trottier Truppe Some hon. members: Yea. Uppal Van Kesteren Van Loan Warkentin The Deputy Speaker: All those opposed will please say nay. Watson Weston (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country) Some hon. members: Nay. Weston (Saint John) Williamson Wong Woodworth Yelich Young (Vancouver South) The Deputy Speaker: In my opinion the yeas have it. Yurdiga Zimmer–— 132 And five or more members having risen: NAYS The Deputy Speaker: Call in the members. Members (1650) Allen (Welland) Angus ● Atamanenko Ayala Bélanger Benskin (The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the Blanchette Blanchette-Lamothe following division:) Brahmi Brison Caron Casey (Division No. 390) Cash Charlton Chicoine Chisholm Christopherson Cleary YEAS Cotler Crowder Members Cullen Cuzner Day Dion Ablonczy Adler Dionne Labelle Doré Lefebvre April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13299

Government Orders Dubé Dubourg opportunities if we choose to make them happen and if we are Easter Freeman Fry Garrison willing to think big and act accordingly. The stakes could not be Genest-Jourdain Giguère higher. Goodale Gravelle Groguhé Harris (Scarborough Southwest) Hughes Julian Kellway Lamoureux Despite lower world oil and gas prices, we know that the long- Lapointe Latendresse term outlook for Canada's energy sector is bright. According to the Liu MacAulay Mai Marston International Energy Agency, global demand for energy will increase Mathyssen May by one-third by 2040. Again, according to the IEA, 74% of this McCallum McGuinty demand will still be met through fossil fuels. Countries such as McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood) Michaud Moore (Abitibi—Témiscamingue) Morin (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot) China, India, and other emerging nations are fuelling this thirst for Murray Nunez-Melo energy. Even developed countries, like those in the European Union, Papillon Patry Péclet Pilon are eager to diversify both the types of energy they use and who Rankin Raynault supplies it to them. Regan Sandhu Scarpaleggia Scott Sellah Sgro Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor) Canada is perfectly positioned to seize this moment in time to Sims (Newton—North Delta) create the quality jobs, the economic growth, and the long-term Sitsabaiesan Stewart prosperity Canadians want for themselves and for their children. We Trudeau–— 75 have some of the largest known reserves of oil and gas in the world, PAIRED the blue chip companies with the wherewithal to bring these reserves Nil to market, the clean technologies and exciting new innovations to do The Deputy Speaker: I declare the motion carried. so in ever more sustainable ways, and the world-class pipelines to transport our oil and gas safely and reliably. In fact, as I have proudly noted many times, between 2008 and 2013, 99.999% of the oil, gas, *** and other petroleum products transported through the federally PIPELINE SAFETY ACT regulated pipelines in Canada arrived safely. This is an extraordinary record, and most countries would be satisfied that it was enough. The House proceeded to the consideration of Bill C-46, An Act to However, our government always strives to do even better. Our amend the National Energy Board Act and the Canada Oil and Gas target is zero events. That is why our focus is on maintaining a Operations Act, as reported (with amendment) from the committee. world-class and even world-leading pipeline safety system. The Deputy Speaker: There being no motions at report stage, the House will now proceed, without debate, to the putting of the question on the motion to concur in the bill at report stage. As many members know, the National Energy Board was established back in 1959, with a very clear mandate to regulate Hon. Greg Rickford (Minister of Natural Resources, CPC) international and interprovincial pipelines, power lines, and energy moved that the bill be concurred in. trade. Now, some 56 years later, the board is overseeing The Deputy Speaker: The question is on the motion. Is it the approximately 73,000 kilometres of pipelines that transport over pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? $100 billion worth of natural gas, oil, and petroleum products every year. Some hon. members: Agreed.

The Deputy Speaker: I declare the motion carried. It is important to note that the independent National Energy Board (Motion agreed to) is responsible for the review of new pipeline proposals. The NEB's work is based on an exhaustive study of the science and on extensive The Deputy Speaker: When shall the bill be read a third time? public consultations to determine if a project is in the overall By leave, now? Canadian public interest. Furthermore, the board can impose Some hon. members: Agreed. enforceable conditions and has important powers to ensure that Hon. Greg Rickford moved that the bill be read the third time pipelines are built and operated in a safe manner. For example, it can and passed. issue administrative penalties to pipeline companies and reduce the amount of product allowed through its pipelines, or even shut them Mrs. Kelly Block (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of down entirely. Natural Resources, CPC): Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today on behalf of our government to open debate on the pipeline safety act at third reading. Canadians can proudly look at this legislation as However, the board's role does not end with reviewing another significant step our government has taken in advancing applications and setting conditions. It also oversees the entire life responsible resource development. That is because we stand on the cycle of a pipeline, from concept to construction, from operation to threshold of a generational opportunity to harness our vast energy eventual abandonment. To perform these duties and responsibilities, wealth. We have a unique opportunity to cement Canada's place in the NEB conducts ongoing audits, inspections, and emergency the world as a secure, reliable, and responsible producer and supplier exercises. Some 300 such compliance actions were conducted in of energy. However, we can only take advantage of these 2013 alone. 13300 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Government Orders At the Standing Committee on Natural Resources, we heard from means that the government would provide an initial financial a variety of witnesses who support our legislation. For example, the backstop to ensure that the NEB had the resources it needed, when it members of Canada's Building Trades Unions take immense pride in needed them, to complete the cleanup. their work to ensure construction of the safest pipelines ever built. Other experts, lawyers, and members of the National Energy Board also appeared before the committee and voiced their own support for In addition, and in the unlikely event that the NEB had to take our goals. There is widespread agreement that the pipeline safety act control of an incident response, the government would also be able is an important step in our efforts to maintain the most rigorous to establish a pipeline claims tribunal. Setting up this tribunal would pipeline safety regime in the world. streamline the claims process. In either case, the legislation would ● (1655) provide that all costs and expenses would be recovered from the industry should the board ever have to step in and take charge. The result is a bill that would inspire even greater confidence in our existing national network of pipelines and that would ensure broader public assurance for new ones coming on stream. This leads me to the third pillar: enshrining the polluter pays principle in law. We fundamentally believe that polluters, and not All Canadians from coast to coast to coast should find comfort in Canadian taxpayers, should be held financially responsible for any this proposed bill. They can rest assured that the energy that fuels costs associated with an incident, responsible whether the polluters their cars, heats their homes, and goes into producing their home are at fault or not. For companies operating major oil pipelines, this electronics and household products will continue to be delivered absolute, no-fault liability would be $1 billion. However, let us be through the safest energy transportation system possible. Anything clear. The liability would remain unlimited in instances where they less would be unacceptable to Canadians and to our government, were at fault. It is a new standard that would leave no doubt or period. wiggle room, no doubt for Canadian taxpayers and no wiggle room This is why the pipeline safety act is built on three key pillars: for pipeline operators. incident prevention, preparedness and response, and liability and compensation. The pipeline safety act would also allow the government to go Looking first at prevention, our government understands that after operators for damage to the environment over the entire responsible resource development demands that we take every lifecycle of a pipeline. This would include even after a pipeline had measure and precaution we can to prevent incidents from ever been abandoned. occurring, and we do. That is why we have proposed amendments to the National Energy Board Act that would build on the steps we have already taken over the past two years. Our goal: to further The absolute or no-fault liability regime created under the bill improve the transparency and operation of the board under its would be one of the most robust and comprehensive in the world. In enabling legislation. addition to actual losses, all types of damage to the environment resulting from oil spills would be covered by the enhanced regime. We have already increased the number of inspections and audits the board conducts each year, and we have given the board the authority to levy administrative monetary penalties. Our new ● (1700) legislation would add to the current preventive measures. In addition to clarifying the board's audit and inspection powers, Under Bill C-46, three broad categories of damage could be the legislation would also provide greater clarity on when to seek the claimed. The first would cover claims for loss or damage incurred by board's permission before disturbing the ground near a pipeline. This any person as a result of a spill, including loss of income and future added clarity would help to prevent potentially life-threatening income. In the case of aboriginal peoples, for example, it would accidents and avoid damage to both property and the environment. include the loss of hunting, fishing, and gathering opportunities. Prevention also depends heavily on the design and construction of our pipelines. That is why the minister has recently asked the The second category would cover the cost and expenses incurred National Energy Board to provide guidance on the use of the best by the federal government, a provincial government, aboriginal available technology in pipeline projects. This includes materials, governing bodies, or any other person in taking action in response to construction methods, and emergency response techniques. a spill. This would include recouping the costs incurred in Second, the pipeline safety act would ensure a robust response in responding to or mitigating the damage from an oil spill. the event of an incident. The legislation would require pipeline operators to have a minimum level of financial resources and to keep a portion of these resources readily accessible for rapid response. The third category would cover claims by the federal or provincial governments for the loss of what is referred to as the non-use value The bill would also allow the Governor in Council to give relating to a public resource that is damaged by a spill. Non-use authority and resources to the NEB to take control of an incident value means that the federal government or a provincial government response or cleanup. The NEB would take control if, in exceptional could bring a claim for damage to environmental assets that are circumstances, the company was unable or unwilling to do so. This valuable to Canadians and future generations. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13301

Government Orders The concept of non-use value was first introduced for environ- ● (1705) mental offences by our government in 2009, and Bill C-46 is consistent with those measures. It is also consistent with the amendments we have introduced to Bill C-22, the energy safety and In short, our resource industries are critical to the strength of our security act, for the offshore oil and gas regime, which also would economy, the quality of our lives and our aspirations for the future. allow governments to claim for the loss of the non-use value of public resources. As recent geopolitical events have shown, energy is also playing a In many ways, these provisions mirror similar steps our critical role in national, continental and indeed global security. Our government has already taken to strengthen marine, rail, and government recognizes that Canada is in a unique position to meet offshore safety. As part of our plan for responsible resource the world's energy needs, but just importantly we also have a development, we have been strengthening environmental protection, responsibility to contribute to global energy security. enhancing aboriginal engagement, and modernizing our regulatory review of major resource projects. Our overriding goal has been to eliminate duplication and to provide investors with predictable That is why, between 2005 and 2014, Canada's crude oil exports beginning-to-end timelines for projects, all the while creating jobs grew by 81%. That is almost 1.3 million barrels per day. Our exports and growing the economy. expanded beyond North America to reach new markets around the world. Indeed, since 2013, Canada has been shipping oil into This is an ongoing process. It demands constant attention and markets from Spain and Ireland to Chile and Hong Kong. In Italy, for continued diligence, which is why our economic action plan 2015 example, our exports accounted for 3.4% of that country's total crude contains new measures and investments to build on this momentum. oil imports in 2014, as measured by volume. There are many items I could highlight from our balanced budget, but let me start by saying what is not in it. I know that what the With the European Parliament's fuel quality directive confirming opposition was hoping to see in our budget was a carbon tax. Both that oil sands crude is as environmentally responsible as other the Liberals and the NDP have been clear that they intend to put a sources, we expect exports to continue to grow. Canadian exports tax on everything Canadians buy, from gas to groceries to electricity. help nations diversify their sources of energy. They help reduce their We have been clear. We will not introduce a carbon tax. dependence on unreliable suppliers and help bolster their energy We are very proud of the targeted investments proposed in security. economic action plan 2015 that are particularly noteworthy for today's debate. The first is $135 million over five years to support project approvals through the major projects management office To continue to play that important role in global energy security, initiative. We are proposing to make this investment because the Canada must expand its ability to get its products to market. development of our natural resources deserves both scrutiny and Pipelines are the safest, most secure and most reliable way of doing careful stewardship. Our processes and systems need to be modern so. and nimble, reflecting the views and needs of citizens and industry alike. As we expand our ability to export, this legislation will set the The second item is a commitment of $34 million over the same standard for pipeline safety, charting a new path to good-paying jobs period of time to continue consultations with Canadians on projects and sustainable growth across the country for generations to come. I assessed under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. urge all members of this House to join our government in continuing to support this legislation. Third, we are proposing to provide $80 million over five years to the National Energy Board to support greater engagement with ● (1710) Canadians and enhanced safety and environmental protection.

Through these investments, we will continue to deliver the kind of [Translation] responsible resource development Canadians have come to expect from their government, development that is critical to our government's economic plan to create jobs, growth, and long-term Ms. Ève Péclet (La Pointe-de-l'Île, NDP): Mr. Speaker, here is prosperity for all Canadians. my question for my hon. colleague: Why do this bill's provisions cover only pipelines that transport at least 250,000 barrels of oil a The fact is, Canada's natural resource sector represents 19% of our day? economy. It accounts for more than half of our merchandise exports and supports 1.8 million jobs directly and indirectly. Canada's natural resource sector is also one of the leading private employers of In the Lac-Mégantic tragedy, a smaller company unfortunately aboriginal people, and let us not forget that natural resource firms caused unimaginable damage. I do not see why this bill excludes have contributed approximately $30 billion per year in revenue to pipelines that transport 150,000 or 200,000 barrels a day. If an governments, revenue that builds hospitals and highways, schools accident or a spill happens, they could cause as much damage as a and subways. pipeline transporting 250,000 or 300,000 barrels a day. 13302 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Government Orders Why does the government think that communities that would be communities specifically, for example, when it comes to monitoring affected by a spill from a smaller pipeline do not deserve the same and response. As I mentioned, we asked to hear from aboriginal protection as a community that would be affected by a spill from a communities on this very important piece of legislation and there has pipeline transporting 250,000 barrels a day? I would like my hon. been widespread support. colleague to explain why that is not covered in the bill. ● (1715) [English] Mrs. Kelly Block: Mr. Speaker, as I stated earlier in my remarks, [Translation] there is widespread agreement that Bill C-46 is an important step in our efforts to maintain the most rigorous regime in the world, the Mr. Alain Giguère (Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, NDP): Mr. Speaker, I most safe regime, a regime that already has a safety record of would like to point out to my distinguished colleague that one of the 99.99%. Bill C-46 will bring even greater confidence to our network serious problems in Canada and the world is that the companies of pipelines and ensure public assurance for new pipelines being doing business in Canada are the same companies that are built. The provisions in Bill C-46 mirror steps our government has responsible for the Exxon Valdez spill and for destroying a river in taken to strengthen marine, rail and offshore safety. the United States. The provisions that the member has been asking for, in terms of When people who have been consistently polluting other places pipelines that will see less than 250,000 barrels flowing through say that they will be careful not to cause pollution in Canada, there is them, will be captured in regulations. a credibility problem. It is all a matter of credibility and we do not Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, trust those companies. the Liberal Party critic had the opportunity to speak on the legislation and expressed just how important it is that we get this Moreover, safe transportation is all well and good, but there is also job done right. At the end of the day, Canada's economy and the matter of jobs. If I, Mr. Giguère, was told that 15,000 jobs were environment are potentially of great benefit if, in fact, we get it right. going to be created in my province's refineries, I would be on board with that. However, what we are being told is that we are going to The question I have for the minister is this. If we look at the last have to assume 100% of the transportation risk, that there will be no number of years, the government has not been successful in building contingency fund and that no jobs will be created. In Quebec, only consensus, whether it is the social contract with Canadians dealing 15 jobs were created to build the pipeline across the province. We are with the environment and pipelines, or dealing with the provincial assuming all of the risks but seeing very little of the profit. governments, in particular, the Alberta and B.C. and other jurisdictions, to bring people together. The pipeline issue and the As a result, the government does not have any credibility. I am security of it is of critical importance, but it also seems that the asking it to do something other than pass a law that imposes a government has not been effective in being able to pull it all together. 250,000-barrel limit on companies and simply requires them to be Can the member provide some feedback as to why she believes careful. That is not enough. A contingency fund must be created. we have had to wait as long as we have to get this legislation and the impact that has had on discussions with the potential expansion of I am therefore asking my colleague to tell us something that will our pipelines? really assuage Canadians' fears. Mrs. Kelly Block: Mr. Speaker, again I will reiterate that there is The Deputy Speaker: Before I recognize the parliamentary widespread agreement that Bill C-46 is an important step in our secretary, I must inform the member that it is not appropriate to use efforts to maintain the most rigorous pipeline safety regime in the proper names, as he just did, when addressing the House. world. The government has worked closely with provinces and The hon. parliamentary secretary. territories, aboriginal communities, environmental groups, insurance companies and industry in the development of this legislation. I am [English] very confident that this legislation appropriately addresses the Mrs. Kelly Block: Mr. Speaker, perhaps the best way to answer concerns raised during these consultations. that question is to go back and restate that the absolute or no-fault Ms. Lois Brown (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of liability regime created under this bill would be one of the most International Development, CPC): Mr. Speaker, my colleague robust and comprehensive in the world. All types of damage to the spoke a bit in her speech about the opportunities that this legislation environment resulting from an oil spill would be covered in this would provide for the people of our aboriginal communities. I legislation. wonder if she would like to expand on that just a little more for the House. Three broad categories could be claimed. These are claims for loss Mrs. Kelly Block: Mr. Speaker, as I have said, our government's or damage incurred by any person as a result of a spill; costs and priority is to continue to create jobs, grow the economy and create expenses incurred by the federal government, provincial govern- long-term prosperity for all Canadians, which includes our first ment, aboriginal governing body, or any other person taking action nations peoples. First nations have made and will continue to make in response to a spill; and claims by the federal or provincial important contributions as a full partner in the development of our governments for the loss of what is referred to as the non-use value natural resources. Our plan would provide training for aboriginal relating to a public resource that is damaged by a spill. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13303

Government Orders I did speak to what we mean by “non-use value”. This means that Bill C-46 establishes a liability regime for federally regulated the federal government or provincial government can bring a claim pipelines in Canada, and although this regime leaves many questions for damage to environmental assets that are valuable to Canadians unanswered, the existing legislation does not provide for much of a and future generations. regime. [Translation] The NDP proposed some 20 amendments at report stage, many of Mr. Guy Caron (Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Bas- which were virtually the same as those proposed by my colleague ques, NDP): Mr. Speaker, in my capacity as the critic for natural from Saanich—Gulf Islands. That is why I am pleased that these resources, I am pleased to rise in the House at third reading to debate requests were heard. We must understand that she was not able to Bill C-46. propose her amendments at report stage. She was asked to present her amendments in committee, which is what generally happens. She This bill moved to report stage very quickly, because clearly, the came to do so and she got just one minute for each of her parties did not really have a chance to properly present their case, amendments. especially the independent members in the House.

At the Standing Committee on Natural Resources, the Con- This is a systematic problem at committee stage. Committees servatives imposed a motion similar to the ones it imposed on all should be a place for debate, so that we can identify the strengths committees, since it has a majority on all committees of the House of and, especially, the flaws of each bill. However, this Conservative Commons, whereby, and I am paraphrasing, when the committee government's method is something completely new to Parliament, clerk receives an order of reference from the House in relation to a and it is undermining our ability to properly debate bills. bill, the clerk must write to each member who is not a member of a caucus represented on the committee to invite the member to send a In the case of the amendments that passed, the government tried to letter to the chair of the committee, in both official languages, stating make first nations members believe that the addition of a definition any proposed amendments to the bill subject to the order of about them to the bill was a show of good faith and openness on its reference. During the clause-by-clause, the chair of the committee part. will allow a member who proposed an amendment to make brief comments in support of it, although the member cannot join in the Like other levels of government, aboriginal governing bodies will debate or vote. be able to sue companies connected to pipelines for recovery of reasonable costs incurred in managing a spill on their land. That is how the committees always operate, and the Standing Committee on Natural Resources is no exception. I think this is a major collective victory. It shows not only that We essentially believe that these manoeuvres violate the rights of aboriginals are full-fledged nations, but also that there is a will to independent parliamentarians or members who belong to a treat them as such. As I said, the parties were on the same parliamentary group and who are nonetheless elected just like any wavelength and proposed many similar amendments that targeted the other member. same flaws in Bill C-46.

The big book of procedure tells us that it is the House, and only In short, Bill C-46 is a first step toward integrating a real polluter- the House, that designates members and associate members of these pays principle into federal pipeline regulations. committees as well as the members that represent the House on joint committees. However, entrenching that in law is not the end of it. We also have to make sure that the provisions of the law respect its principles. The Chair has already established that that is a fundamental right of the House. As for the committees, they have no power in that The NDP voted in favour of the principle underlying Bill C-46 regard, especially since the rules specifically state that an MP who is because that step forward was better than the status quo. not a committee member may not vote or move motions. ● (1720) Report stage was usually the opportunity for these members to have their amendments heard, to debate them and to participate in the vote. Instead, practically everything is now managed, debated I must nevertheless point out that at least one witness gave very and voted in committee, sometimes even in camera. engaging testimony during the committee's study of Bill C-46. Ian Miron of Ecojustice described this bill as a step forward, just as we This is a very important change in the functioning of the House have done. He also said that it was more of a “polluter might pay” and it greatly affects the rights of members and their ability to principle than a polluter pays principle. The reason is that Bill C-46 properly carry out their duties of representing their constituents and is highly discretionary. It makes a number of tools available to the holding the government to account. National Energy Board and the government, but they have complete discretion when it comes to using those tools. The lack of absolute However, despite everything, I must highlight the work done by regulations, if I can put it that way, means that this legislation does my colleague, the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands, who had two not fully respect the polluter pays principle. It means that the amendments passed despite this unfair and undemocratic govern- principle will apply if the National Energy Board and the ment tactic. government want it to. 13304 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Private Members' Business These regulations and this liability regime will now be governed ● (1725) by the National Energy Board, which has an especially important The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin): Order. role to play given that Canadians' trust and their sense of safety with respect to infrastructure and the regulations in place will depend on The member for Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques how well the board fulfills its mandate. will have nine minutes when the House resumes consideration of this bill. The report published in 2013 following a comprehensive study by the Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and It being 5:30 p.m., the House will now proceed to the Natural Resources clearly states that those two concepts go hand in consideration of private members' business as listed on today's hand: order paper. If an accident occurs, there must be trust that the “polluter pays” principle, a principle applied to all modes of transport, is backed by concrete action. Social license is earned when citizens have trust in emergency and spill response capabilities, based on clear plans for well-organized recovery and rehabilitation of PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS the environment, as well as a means for compensating for damages. ● (1730) Even the president and CEO of the Canadian Energy Pipeline Association at the time, Brenda Kenny, suggested in the study that, [Translation] “it is not enough in today’s climate to obtain a regulatory license or SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED BUSINESSES permit in order to proceed with energy projects”. Mr. Alain Giguère (Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, NDP) moved: This illustrates how important it is for businesses and the industry That, in the opinion of the House, small- and medium-sized business owners are to have public confidence. This was corroborated by the testimony in the driving force of job creation in Canada, and Canadian retailers and merchants pay committee of a representative of Canada's Building Trades Unions, credit card merchant fees that are among the highest in the world, and therefore the government should take immediate steps to make the cost of living more affordable who said he agrees with the polluter pays principle, which indicates for the middle class by: (a) lowering costs for businesses and consumers by reducing to us that the unions and workers truly understand that environ- transaction fees charged to merchants; and (b) allowing merchants to disclose to the mental protection and robust protection, prevention and account- consumer the transaction costs relating to the payment method chosen at the point of ability standards are ironically the things that are going to help them sale. keep their jobs. He said: Mr. Speaker, this motion has to do with credit card fees. For a culture of safety to take hold, there needs to be interaction Unfortunately, Canada has the highest fees in the world. Countries between common values and beliefs on one hand, and the structures around the world have made attempts to address this problem. and oversight mechanisms of an organization on the other hand, with More and more Canadians are making payments with credit the aim of producing standards of behaviour. Unfortunately, we are cards, which really end up being payment cards in many cases. The way off the mark. With its bills and regulations, the government has problem is that the fees can vary considerably and that some new done nothing but cause the public to lose confidence not only in the credit cards being issued—loyalty cards in particular—offer travel industry, but also in the key regulators. If the oil companies want points. public approval for the pipelines, then Canadians need assurance that these projects are sustainable and that approval processes are open, However, credit card companies do not pay for these plane tickets. rigorous and fair. That is clearly still not the case, and this bill will They send the bill to merchants, which means that some credit cards not change much, unfortunately. carry fees of 4% or higher. The problem is that many small businesses have a profit margin that varies between 2.25% and In fact, only 27% of Canadians believe that the Government of 2.75%, especially in the retail food sector. This means that when a Canada can respond effectively to an oil spill at sea, and only 32% customer pays with this new credit card, the small business owner share the same view for spills on land. The English Bay oil spill in actually loses money. Vancouver in early April should serve as an example of the government's readiness to respond. Civil society groups and The goal is to limit this type of abuse, but it is important to do so environmentalists have been saying for years that Canada is not without destroying a payment system that must be preserved. prepared for a major oil spill. The 2010 Kalamazoo spill in Michigan Canada needs to be able to use credit cards in small businesses. was a turning point for the oil sector. New standards were established However, small businesses want to remain profitable, which is only and discoveries were made about how oil from the oil sands behaves, natural. The problem is that credit cards often do not let them do that, which requires new standards for research, prevention and response. particularly the new credit cards with really high rates, which are becoming more popular. The problem is that instead of working with the utmost transparency, the board encourages corporations to be secretive. I am sure, Mr. Speaker, that you would not mind taking a little trip According to the 2013 Senate report: down south for two weeks in the dead of winter. If you have a credit By regulation, every pipeline company is required to submit Emergency Response card that offers that sort of opportunity, you would be quite happy to Plans (ERPs) on a facility-by-facility basis and the ERPs must be approved by the use it. The problem is that small businesses are the ones that are NEB. These plans require companies to assess the risk of a spill and outline the paying for the plane tickets. When small business have to pay fees of details of a response. They must be up-to-date with corresponding emergency manuals and must be reviewed regularly. On June 26, 2013, the federal government 4% while their profit margin is only 2.5%, it is clear that they are announced that it would require ERPs to be more accessible to the... headed for bankruptcy. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13305

Private Members' Business Small business owners have it tough these days. They are asking 500% disparity is huge, and that is on a voluntary basis. That us to do the same thing that is being done in many other countries. pertains only to standard credit cards. As far as I know, Australia's Conservative government would certainly never be accused of having socialist sympathies. Similarly, If you have to deal with a premium credit card, this becomes in England, under Mr. Cameron's government, these rates were totally unmanageable. However, those kinds of cards are becoming greatly limited to 0.5% and they have even been limited to 0.3% increasingly popular. Everyone loves to travel and book flights using elsewhere in Europe. That is one-eighth of what is charged in a credit card, except that the plane ticket does nothing for the Canada. It is a discrepancy that ranges between 300% and 800%. As merchant. When he goes to the bank to ask for a loan guarantee to for the infamous credit cards with a rate of 4% or higher, they turn pay for new inventory, he is told that his operating costs are too high. out to be 12 times more expensive. This nonsense has to stop. People He can only reduce wages so much. cannot pay such high credit card fees. Let us also note that credit card terminals alone often cost $30 a One merchant I know, Mr. Bélisle, who owns a pub called Bière month. That is an added cost. au menu in Bois-des-Filion, told me that he cannot automatically pass the cost on to consumers because he cannot sell hamburgers for What we are proposing is that we work together to figure out a $25. There comes a point when the cost simply cannot be passed on rate that allows small businesses to survive while maintaining a to consumers, because they just will not buy a $25 hamburger. His payment system that works. This is not a threat to credit card problem is that he also owns a sausage shop. He said that at that companies, as we know from precedents set in Europe, Australia and business, he does not even accept credit cards. There is also England. Mr. Gaudreau from Laval, who told me that he thought he could start a small business with three or four employees, but with the extra Even the U.S. Senate, which had the same problem, wanted to see costs of 1.6% for Visa, 2.6% for AMEX and 1.55% for Mastercard, if regulating credit card fees had had a negative impact on the he could not do it. economies of those countries. It concluded that there was no negative impact and that credit card companies are still doing very ● (1740) well in those countries. ● (1735) His profit margin is about 2%. Three-quarters of his profit will basically go to a company that will do nothing for him. It will not do People still use credit cards; in fact, they are using them more than any marketing or advertising, and it will not attract customers. For ever. this business owner it is simply a bill he must pay, and for that reason he is asking for regulations. However, small businesses do not want to pay 4% to 4.25% for the so-called privilege credit cards. That is unreasonable. By For our part, we are going to get together to analyze the situation comparison, a debit card costs five cents to use whether the and what happens in other countries. We are going to drastically transaction is for $3, $4 or $3,000. The fee is not a percentage. It is a reduce the interest rate, although we will exercise caution. fixed amount. Considering that 1.5% of $1,000 is $15, that shows how much more one costs than the other. This is not a new problem. Many businesses have been asking for this for many years. We are not going to jeopardize the credit card system. It will continue to exist. As demonstrated by the U.S. Senate, regulations The 90,000 small and medium-sized businesses that belong to the will not destroy this payment method. We will keep it. When we sit Small Business Matters Coalition would like to have a chance to around the table to establish the interest rate, the credit card breathe one of these days, as would members of the Canadian companies will be there as well and they will have to justify what Convenience Stores Association, the Association des marchands they charge. dépanneurs et épiciers du Québec, the Retail Council of Canada and Restaurants Canada. All of these people have been telling us that It goes without saying that some payment methods, like high they can no longer survive. People in my riding tell me that the fees interest rate cards, will disappear. We cannot ask a business owner to cost them $15,000 to $25,000 for a small business with six or seven go bankrupt because he sells things to people with specific credit employees. They say it is not working anymore. Small and medium- cards. sized businesses have no choice but to refuse credit card payments. That is how serious the problem is. Transparency is another important aspect. When we get a bill, the Not only do we risk losing SMEs, but the entire credit card system taxes, the GST and the QST, are listed on it. What people are asking as a payment method could be in jeopardy. for is that the cost of the credit card also be included on the bill. There is currently a clause in the contract we sign to use a credit card In a 2013 ruling, the Competition Tribunal called on the that prohibits that very thing. Transparency is not allowed. government to take action, because it found that there was a non- competitive situation. The government responded by saying that it If we have the right to review the GST and QST amounts, then I hoped that credit card companies would limit the rate to 1.5%, but on think people should also have the right to review what it costs them a voluntary basis. Even that percentage is 500% higher than in to use a credit card. This is especially important because some of the Europe. I do not want to hear anyone say that in Europe countries are costs have gone down in the past few years. For better or worse, the too consumer friendly and they want to destroy private enterprise. A sales tax has been reduced. 13306 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Private Members' Business The problem is that these tax cuts were clawed back because banks often own pension funds, including the Canada pension plan credit card margins went up. They increased from 1.5% to 4% and and the Quebec pension plan. any economic benefit that consumers might have derived from the tax cuts voted in by this government was absorbed by the credit card How can I say this? Why nationalize something that already companies. This needs to stop. belongs to us?

For retailers alone, the credit card fees amount to more than [English] $850 million, and that is just for the retail sales sector. Obviously this has to stop sooner or later. Enough is enough. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I will not necessarily question that logic at this point, but what I would As I said earlier, and it bears repeating, we have to be competitive say is that, whether it is interchange, merchants' fees, or rates, at the internationally. If the tourists who travel through Europe pay less end of the day what we really need to look at is the fact that Canada's there for goods and services than they would pay in Canada, then economic reality and potential of growth into the future is going to there is a good chance that we are losing business. We must remain be tied in to small businesses. competitive, and a 500% difference is obviously unreasonable. I am therefore pleased to say that this resolution is supported by Whether it is the tourism industry or the manufacturing industry, the small business community, a very important community in there are so many industries that are very dependent on consumer Canada that accounts for 40% of our GDP. spending. These small businesses do not have the option, per se, to opt out of having those consumer-friendly purchasing machines. It is One day we will have to think of them and return the favour. not really an option for them. ● (1745) It is important for us to recognize that the government does have a [English] role to play. My question for the member is related to that. Given the Mr. Mark Adler (York Centre, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I think the importance of our small businesses to our nation—and we see that in member is confusing the interchange fee with the merchant rate. I the form of the motion, which I applaud—would he not agree it is think he is lumping them both together. imperative that we come to grips and deal with this issue, the sooner the better? The interchange fee is the amount that is carved off from the transaction to make the credit card system work. The merchant fee is [Translation] typically about 1.5%. Our government has negotiated with financial institutions and credit card companies on the merchant rate to come Mr. Alain Giguère: Mr. Speaker, 40% of the GDP generated by up with a voluntary code of conduct, which the credit card our country depends on small and medium-sized businesses, companies have agreed to. businesses with fewer than 100 employees. With regard to the retail sector, credit card fees, commonly referred to as credit card I would like to pose the following questions. processing fees, vary between 1.5% and 4%. We need to act quickly to remedy that. The member spoke about Europe, that we should adopt more of a European model. Since he did not mention any countries in Other countries have done so without destroying this payment particular, let us assume he is talking about Greece. Would the system, which must be preserved. Obviously, I am surprised that the member propose that we adopt a Greek model to follow in terms of Conservatives did not introduce this bill themselves. credit card and credit and financial institutions? If we look back at the Regina Manifesto, when the CCF was ● (1750) founded, it called for the nationalization of banks. In 1962, when the [English] NDP was founded, it also called for the nationalization of banks. Is the NDP now calling for the nationalization of banks? How would Mr. Mark Adler (York Centre, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I appreciate he enforce this proposed scheme that he has cooked up? this opportunity to discuss Motion No. 574, a motion which focuses [Translation] on lower costs for businesses and consumers by reducing transaction fees. Mr. Alain Giguère: Mr. Speaker, first of all, the European regulations do not pertain to just one country. They affect all of Let me reassure the hon. member that under the leadership of the Europe. That law was introduced Europe-wide. Every member of the Prime Minister, our government is standing up for consumers and European Union is affected by it. saving Canadians money. Second, what my colleague is forgetting and what is very important is that credit card companies do business with banks, but We know that Canadian families work hard to make ends meet banks do not own credit cards. The member might be confused about and every dollar certainly does count. While companies will look out that. for their bottom line, our government is looking out for all Canadians. When Canadians make decisions about how to spend The nationalization of banks is an old ghost from the 60s. It would their money, they must be assured of a voice, a choice and fair cost Canada hundreds of billions of dollars or more. Ironically, these treatment. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13307

Private Members' Business In the October 2013 Speech from the Throne, our government payment users; measures to facilitate the pass-through of credit card committed to take additional action to protect Canadian consumers. fee reductions to merchants; a new complaints handling process We understand that Canadians are tired of hidden fees. That is why available to merchants with code-related complaints; enhanced we have secured voluntary commitments from Canada's eight major disclosure requirements that will require plain language disclosure of banks to enhance low-cost bank accounts and offer no-cost accounts. key contract terms and conditions and merchant fees in information Banks also committed to provide free monthly printed credit card summary boxes on merchant contracts; providing greater flexibility statements. We have also worked with the provinces to maintain the for merchants to exit their contracts without penalty and limiting the integrity of the framework for payday lending-type products and to automatic renewal of contracts; new branding requirements for support provincial efforts to regulate appropriately all payday premium credit cards to make these cards more easily identifiable to lending-type high interest rate products. merchants at the point-of-sale; and new disclosure requirements for credit card issuers to inform consumers that apply for premium credit However, our initiatives go beyond lawmaking and regulation, cards that use of these cards may result in higher merchant fees. and include public outreach and education. In April 2014, we announced the appointment of Jane Rooney as Canada's first ever Financial Literacy Leader. Her mandate is to ● (1755) collaborate and coordinate activities with stakeholders to contribute to and support initiatives that strengthen the financial literacy of all Canadians. This initiative will allow our government to broaden its efforts to help Canadians make more informed choices for Most elements of the code will come into force within nine themselves and for their families. months of the date on which the networks adopt the code. Some Accordingly, our government believes that the best consumer elements, such as the measures to facilitate the passthrough of protection framework is one in which there is competition, fees are interchange rate reductions to merchants and the new rights for disclosed and consumers can exercise choice. merchants regarding acceptance of contactless payments, took effect in April. For example, we have introduced regulations relating to credit agreements, including lines of credit and credit cards, which came into force in 2010. These regulations limit business practices that are not beneficial to consumers. They require the provision of clear and There will be a slightly longer implementation period for the new timely information to Canadians about credit products with a enhanced disclosure requirements on account of the significant particular emphasis on credit cards. Specifically, our government has systems changes that acquirers will need to make. taken steps to update the existing financial consumer protection framework with several key measures. These include, for example, mandating an effective minimum 21-day interest-free grace period on all new credit card purchases when a customer pays the Let me assure the hon. member that the updates to the code were outstanding balance in full, and introducing a fee summary box. developed in close consultation with a broad range of stakeholders, In November 2014, the Minister of Finance welcomed proposals including members representing the credit and debit card networks, submitted by Visa and MasterCard to reduce their credit card fees for small business retailers and consumers. Bilateral consultations were merchants, which should ultimately result in lower prices for also conducted with acquirers and small merchant associations. In consumers. fact, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business said at the time that the code “has served merchants extremely well.... [It] has Specifically, the proposals from Visa and MasterCard will: done an excellent job in ensuring some fair ground rules and voluntarily reduce their respective credit card fees for consumer maintaining Canada’s low-cost debit system.” cards to an average effective rate of 1.5% for a period of five years; ensure that all merchants receive a reduction in credit card fees; provide a greater reduction for small and medium-size enterprises and charities which have the least amount of bargaining power; and Consumers will also benefit from a new requirement that credit require annual verification by an independent third party to ensure card issuers disclose to consumers who apply for premium credit compliance. cards that use of these cards will result in higher merchant fees. This Last month, our government announced the enhanced code of will help to empower consumers in selecting their payment method conduct for the debit and credit card industry. These new changes by disclosing the actual cost to merchants of accepting payments will make the code even stronger by addressing unfair business with a premium credit card. practices and improving transparency for merchants and consumers, including new provisions that apply specifically to mobile payments. The revised code contains several enhancements to address unfair This of course is not new. Throughout our time in office, our business practices and improve transparency for merchants and government has been focused on helping Canadian consumers consumers, including: extending the application of the code to identify and take advantage of the best possible financial products mobile payments, including new consumer protections for mobile and services for their needs. 13308 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Private Members' Business As we announced in economic action plan 2013, we are working As just one example, in 2009, worries over merchant fees and to develop a comprehensive financial consumer code to better billing practices prompted members of the Liberal caucus to call for protect consumers of financial products and ensure that they have the more protection than would be provided by any voluntary or necessary tools to make responsible financial decisions. Such industry-imposed code of conduct. The Liberal caucus sought measures empower and protect Canadian consumers and they regulatory and legislative interventions similar, but far more increase their financial literacy by providing them with the right comprehensive and in focus, to Motion No. 574. information at the right time so they can make financial decisions that best suit their needs. Our plan included measures to end double-cycle billing, to allow As our actions have clearly demonstrated, our government clearly consumers to opt out of credit card contracts if interest rates are understands the importance of monitoring the credit card and debit increased by providers, and a full range of measures aimed at helping card industry in Canada. In this regard, the motion's recommenda- small and medium-sized businesses provide goods and services to tions are well intentioned, but not required. consumers at a fair and reasonable price. However, the Conserva- tives refused to be swayed. I therefore urge hon. members to vote against the motion and instead support our government's ongoing measures to protect A voluntary code, authored by the Conservatives, was an businesses and consumers in a competitive marketplace. inadequate attempt to ease concerns sparked by the entry of Visa Hon. Judy Sgro (York West, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to and MasterCard into the debit and credit market. The Liberal caucus be able to take a few minutes tonight to comment on Motion No. rightly feared that without enforcement tools, any code of conduct 574. I would like to read the motion for anyone who happens to be for debit and credit card companies would miss the mark. following the discussion: That, in the opinion of the House, small- and medium-sized business owners are The fact is small and medium-sized businesses exist at the bottom the driving force of job creation in Canada, and Canadian retailers and merchants pay of the financial food chain. This means their ability to effectively credit card merchant fees that are among the highest in the world, and therefore the government should take immediate steps to make the cost of living more affordable negotiate terms and arrangements with banks and other lenders is for the middle class by: (a) lowering costs for businesses and consumers by reducing very limited. transaction fees charged to merchants; and (b) allowing merchants to disclose to the consumer the transaction costs relating to the payment method chosen at the point of sale. I believed then and I believe now that we need balanced but serious measures to deal with these issues on behalf of small and I also want to speak about the need for measures like this, the need medium-sized businesses, not voluntary measures. to support more small and medium-sized businesses, and the consumers and the communities who rely on them. Now, to some, particularly those sitting on the other side of the To thousands of Canadians, the need to support small and room, these matters should be sorted out by the markets. Proponents medium-sized businesses is obvious. I only wish the Conservative of an unregulated market often suggest that government intervention government was of the same mind. will ultimately hurt consumers. They often cite Australia's credit card fees, card benefit reductions, and the introduction of surcharging as Small businesses account for about 30% of Canada's GDP, while consequences of interchange fee regulation. medium-sized businesses account for an additional 9%. Combined, small and medium-sized business owners account for 50% of all net ● (1800) job creation. With numbers like these, one is left to wonder why budget 2015/17 is silent on these issues. Budget 2015/17 fails to offer even a glimpse of a plan for job growth and it ignores the fact This narrow thinking has long been a cornerstone, of course, of that unemployment is still higher than it was before the recession Conservative fiscal philosophy, despite pleas to the contrary as well began, all of this while remaining oblivious to the government's as evidence to the contrary from the small business community. This rhetoric on its so-called red tape reduction. As with all things hands-off approach to the problems faced by small and medium- Conservative, taxpayer-funded ads always trump real action. sized businesses is plain wrong, and it allows large lenders to run the table on small businesses. In contrast, Liberals know a strong economy ensures that every Canadian has a real and fair chance at success. That means growing Let us look at real-world evidence. As recently as yesterday, incomes and real job opportunities by supporting and promoting the national media reports verified that starting on June 1, Canada's success of small and medium-sized businesses. Protecting and major banks are introducing new or higher fees for a variety of promoting the interests and advancement of small and medium-sized accounts and transactions, including debit purchases, mortgage and businesses and consumers has long been a cornerstone objective of loan payments, and children's accounts. the Liberal Party of Canada and the Liberal caucus. While this specific motion is sponsored by an NDP MP, the These changes are hitting everyone, from children trying to save Liberal caucus has a history of working to lower the fees and interest for their future education to seniors and small business owners trying rates paid by small and medium-sized businesses and their to manage their already limited resources. The market is regulating customers, and we are glad to have NDP support as we move the price of these things, but not to the benefit of small and medium- toward this goal. sized businesses and those who rely on them. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13309

Private Members' Business The Financial Consumer Agency of Canada looked into the issue fees will be capped at 0.3% as of September 2015. That is a of bank fees and whether the sector has the best interests of significant difference. consumers in mind. While the report avoided any solid conclusions, it did find that the average monthly fee on chequing accounts increased by 13.6% between 2005 and 2013. More troubling still, during the same period, it was found that there was a 46% increase in Furthermore, under the terms of their service agreements with so-called variable fees, that is, one-off transactions that are not credit card companies, merchants are not allowed to pass these fees covered by the regular monthly banking plans. All this happened on to their customers, as this would increase the price overall of the while the banking sector was enjoying record profits. merchandise. Of course, these examples are consumer based, and Motion No. 574 primarily focuses on the business end of the discussion, but there are clearly crossover implications. My husband and I owned and operated a small business for many In 2012, retailers paid $832 million in credit card fees. years, so I know very well what it is like to worry about making Eventually, as the retailers' costs remain high in a highly competitive payroll or settling accounts or simply running out of money at the industry and demand continues for lower prices, these costs will end of the month. inevitably be passed on to consumers, whether intentional or not. Higher bank fees, whether merchant fees or any other form of variable cost, hit small businesses right in the wallet and hinder their prospects of success. I am tired of throwing small business owners to Hence, consumers should know about these fees. Therefore, New the whims of the market. It is time to reset the balance and give those Democrats want more transparency from the credit card companies. who are really driving the economy a chance at success. We are asking them to always disclose to the customer the ● (1805) transaction cost related to the payment method chosen. Ms. Rathika Sitsabaiesan (Scarborough—Rouge River, NDP): Mr. Speaker, I rise today in proud support of Motion No. 574, introduced by my New Democrat colleague, the member of Parliament for Marc-Aurèle-Fortin. The government has been consistently supporting its friends. We Across Canada and in Scarborough—Rouge River, small and know who they are: their wealthy insider friends. Small businesses medium-sized businesses employ the vast majority of residents and have watched their tax rate drop 1% since the Conservatives took are important job creators. They are the engines that drive the office, from 12% to 11%. While they worked so hard and created the economic development and vitality of our communities. They have jobs in our communities, they saw corporate income tax rates drop been asking the government to reduce the merchant fees charged by seven percentage points, from 22% all the way down to 15%, which credit card companies for years, and I am proud that the official included a now defunct surtax, over that same period. Following an opposition, the New Democrats, are actually hearing their call. NDP proposal, the recent budget proposes to drop the small business tax rate by 2% by 2019, but we will have to see if that actually Small and medium-sized enterprises have a large impact on the happens and if the changes materialize. Canadian economy. Data from Industry Canada's 2013 key small business statistics show that together, small and medium-sized businesses represent 99.8% of Canada's employer businesses. They employ over 80% of the people working in the private sector in Canada. We want to extend a helping hand to small businesses, the real job creators in Canada, and stimulate investment and innovation in These companies are faced with rising costs and razor-thin manufacturing. margins. Therefore, the fact that Canadian small and medium-sized businesses pay some of the highest transaction fees in the world is both unfair and unsustainable. These businesses need our support. We are speaking of merchant fees. What are they, one might ask? This is not a new issue. Since 2008, several retail associations, Every time a customer makes a credit card purchase, the merchant such as the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, the Retail must pay the credit card company a premium on that purchase. The Council of Canada, and the Small Business Matters Coalition, have interchange fee comprises the majority of the fee or the charge the lobbied against these exorbitant merchant fees. In fact, in July 2013, merchant pays to the credit card company. The Retail Council of the Competition Tribunal said that the conditions imposed on Canada estimates that interchange fees averaged 1.7% in 2014 for Canadian businesses by Visa and MasterCard were anti-competitive MasterCard and 1.61% for Visa. and that the fees they charged were excessive. The tribunal called on the government to regulate the industry. Clearly, the Conservative We can look at some of the sister countries we compare our government has not regulated the industry effectively, since the country to, such as Australia. The interchange fees there have been credit card merchant fees in Canada remain among the highest in the capped at 0.5%, and in Europe, many of the countries' interchange world. 13310 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Private Members' Business The government's form of regulation was that in November 2014, When credit card interchange regulations were introduced in MasterCard and Visa submitted a voluntary proposal to the federal Australia in November 2003, both Visa and MasterCard predicted finance minister to reduce their interchange fees to an average rate of that the card payment system in Australia would suffer badly from 1.5% for five years, as of April 2015. That is the government's way this reform. MasterCard stated that the setting of interchange fees is of taking action: just accepting the credit card company's voluntary such a delicate balance that to interfere with it could lead to a death proposal and calling it a day. Remember that in Australia, the spiral process. interchange fees are capped at 0.5%, and in Europe, they will be capped at 0.3% later this year. However, evidence shows that, contrary to these predictions, ● (1810) credit card usage has continued to increase strongly since Australia's Instead of taking on the task of regulating the industry, the reforms of credit interchange. Card issuer profitability has not been Minister of Finance issued a news release stating: harmed by the reforms. Issuers have reduced costs and increased As a result of the voluntary proposals, there is no need for the Government to efficiency. The Reserve Bank of Australia has concluded that the regulate the interchange rates set by the credit card networks That is not really lower costs for merchants are flowing through into lower prices for government action. the consumer due to the competitive environment in which most merchants operate. The minister did indicate that the government could take action if MasterCard and Visa did not comply with their public commitments. However, the Minister of Finance did not ensure that the credit card What the Australian experience demonstrates to us is that, despite companies needed to make the merchant fees significantly lower. significant reductions in the interchange fees, credit card usage has When the announcement was made by the credit card companies, continued its strong growth. Card payment systems can operate Yves Servais from the Association des marchands dépanneurs et healthily and grow strongly despite regulated reductions in épiciers du Québec said, “We are skeptical about the voluntary interchange income for issuers. agreement between the government and Visa and MasterCard. There is no information on how to ensure compliance with the agreement, At a time when Canadian small businesses are facing increasing and no government agency has been mandated to handle the follow- pressures from the weak Canadian dollar, rising inflation, and other up and annual evaluation.” increasing costs, it is integral that the government acts to support The fact that the fee reduction is not significant enough and the small and medium enterprises. fact that there is no one charged with enforcing this reduction are both big problems. I strongly support Motion No. 574, and I am pleased to stand with The NDP has proposed the creation of an ombudsman responsible the official opposition New Democrats in support of small and for working with private sector partners to reduce credit card fees. medium-sized businesses in Canada. Clearly, the government is not paying attention, and small businesses deserve to have a person committed to working with them. ● (1815) This is an important middle-class issue. Too many Canadian families are struggling and cannot continue to pay higher fees on all Mr. Andrew Saxton (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the merchandise they are purchasing. of Finance, CPC): Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to be here tonight The Conservatives have abandoned small businesses in favour of to have the opportunity to showcase our government's work to more profitable and prosperous corporations, like the credit card reduce credit card acceptance fees and ensure that consumers and companies, who they support. businesses are treated fairly. Gary Sands, chair of the Small Business Matters Coalition, wrote to the government in November 2014 saying: I also find myself speaking to another mind-boggling motion Members of the Small Business Matters Coalition, representing thousands of where the NDP has no ground to stand on when it comes to businesses across Canada, urge the Government of Canada to reduce credit card supporting small business and consumers. After all, it voted against swipe fees and to bring fairness and transparency to the Canadian Payments Industry. every single one of our consumer protection measures. In turn, our members pledge that the reduction in credit card fees will be to the benefit of consumers and communities across Canada, through improved competi- tiveness, increased investment, job creation and reduced consumer prices. Our government understands it is no secret that small businesses Are those not all things that we do want to see in this country? are the lifeblood of the Canadian economy. However, what separates us from the opposition parties is that we have taken clear action to Nevertheless, the Retail Council of Canada is committed to support them, rather than rhetoric and deathbed conversions. Small continue to press for deeper cuts to bring interchange in line with the businesses account for over 90% of all businesses in Canada and fees charged elsewhere. The NDP has joined this commitment, and employ half of the working men and women in the Canadian private we will continue until we have a more fair and just system that sector. Our government believes that small businesses should spend respects the economic engines of our communities, the small and their time growing their businesses and creating jobs, not choking on medium-sized businesses. high taxes and red tape. April 30, 2015 COMMONS DEBATES 13311

Private Members' Business What does the member opposite propose? He proposes that we Visa and MasterCard already started to implement the reductions in lower costs for businesses and consumers by reducing transaction April 2015. fees charged to merchants and allow merchants to disclose to the consumer the transaction costs relating to the payment method chosen at the point of sale. I was surprised to hear that the NDP even ● (1820) recognizes the importance of small and medium-sized businesses at all. As for the middle class, with a clear plan to raise taxes on the middle class, I find it hard to believe they want to help the middle- The purpose of these voluntary commitments is simple. It is to class Canadian. reduce the cost of credit card acceptance for merchants in order to keep prices low for consumers. I am not sure if the member opposite Allow me to talk about our record on supporting small business. missed this, but this agreement will help consumers and merchants We have already cut taxes significantly for small businesses and their alike. owners. We cut the small business tax rate to 11% in 2008. In economic action plan 2015 we have gone further by proposing a new plan to reduce small business taxes to 9% by 2019. That is the largest Let me reassure the hon. member that if the reductions in small business tax cut in 25 years. We increased the lifetime capital interchange fees are not passed along to merchants or the overall cost gains exemption on qualified small business shares to $750,000 from of accepting credit cards increases at any time during the period $500,000 in 2007. In economic action plan 2015 we further covered by these commitments due to actions by Visa or enhanced the exemption for farmers and fishers to $1 million, MasterCard, the government reserves the right to rescind its recognizing the importance of these assets for the retirement plans of acceptance of the voluntary commitments. Canadians.

We also reduced small businesses' El premiums by introducing the Now let me turn our attention to the enhanced code of conduct for small business job credit. This credit is expected to save small the debit and credit card industry that was announced last month. It businesses more than $550 million over 2015-16. It is estimated that aims to promote fairness in the credit card markets and addresses the this measure will reduce taxes for small businesses and their owners issues that businesses told us about. We worked hard to fix the by $2.7 billion over the 2015-16 to 2019-20 period. Almost 700,000 problems. Merchants will now have a new, more user-friendly small businesses from coast to coast to coast will benefit from this complaints process for code-related complaints. We are improving rate reduction. It will enable them to retain more earnings that can be disclosure requirements within contracts so that information used to reinvest and create jobs. summary boxes outlining terms and conditions and merchant fees When it comes to promoting job creation and economic growth, are in plain language. Businesses will have more flexibility to exit our government continues to make responsive and responsible their contracts without penalty. As well, the code will now apply to decisions. We are also continuously cutting red tape and reducing the mobile payments. tax compliance requirements faced by businesses. The NDP and the member voted against all of our past measures This stronger code also offers new protection for consumers. to support small businesses and they will continue to do so in the Credit card issuers will have to inform consumers that using future. premium cards may mean higher fees. There will be new branding requirements for premium cards to make them easily identifiable. We Allow me to move on to merchant fees and credit and debit card are introducing new protections with mobile devices so that use. Our government is implementing policies focused on raising consumers have choice, not the big banks and credit card networks. Canada's economic potential and creating stable, well-paying jobs. However, we cannot rest on our laurels. These are uncertain economic times at home and abroad. Small businesses are stretching Taking together all that we have done since 2006, and what is to dollars as far as they can go. They need more support so our come, I can say with confidence that protecting consumers and economy can continue to grow. That is why our government took supporting small business remain a central focus of our government, timely action to address credit card fees. Every time a merchant and small businesses have noticed. I will name a few. accepts a credit card payment, the merchant pays fees and like any other cost, fees mean higher prices for consumers. Last fall, we accepted voluntary commitments by Visa Canada and The Canadian Federation of Independent Business stated: MasterCard Canada to cut credit card fees by close to 10%. Specifically, the proposals from Visa and MasterCard will —the Code of Conduct for the Credit and Debit Card Industry...has served voluntarily reduce their respective credit card fees for consumer merchants extremely well....[It] has done an excellent job in ensuring some fair cards to an average effective rate of 1.5% for a period of five years. ground rules and maintaining Canada’s low-cost debit system. They will ensure that all merchants receive a reduction in credit card fees. They will provide a greater reduction for small and medium- sized enterprises and charities, which have the least amount of The president of the Retail Council of Canada stated, “I am bargaining power. They will require annual verification by an delighted that merchants will have full choice in which networks and independent third party to ensure compliance. More importantly, payment methods to accept”. 13312 COMMONS DEBATES April 30, 2015

Private Members' Business Members do not have to take my word for it. Given all of the were anti-competitive and that the fees they charged were too high. aforementioned consideration, we do not need to make amendments The tribunal asked the government to fix these problems. The to the motion. Nor is it a necessary one. It is only our government government merely reviewed its voluntary code of conduct—yes, that has a real track record for supporting the middle class, small voluntary—and did nothing else. businesses and Canadian consumers. For that reason, I encourage all members to vote against the motion. This Conservative government is abandoning small businesses in [Translation] favour of more profitable and prosperous companies. In its 2015 budget, the government promises to reduce the small business tax Mrs. Djaouida Sellah (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, NDP): Mr. rate, but that tax cut, like most of the measures in this budget, will Speaker, I am honoured to speak today. My colleague from Marc- not take effect until 2016. Aurèle-Fortin moved a motion today that makes a lot of sense. This motion would support our small and medium-sized businesses and The NDP wants concrete, effective measures. Promises that will our local economies. That is why I ask all my colleagues to support not be kept until 2016 do not belong in a 2015 budget. The member this motion and set partisanship aside. for Saint-Lambert's Motion No. 585 will force the Conservatives to Canada has a vibrant entrepreneurial culture, and instead of vote on this issue. promoting this culture, the government has raised taxes for small and Ever since the Conservatives came to power, they have constantly medium-sized businesses since it came to power. The Canadian been giving tax breaks worth tens of billions of dollars to large Convenience Stores Association acknowledges that the credit card corporations. They can always find money to give tax breaks to swipe fees charged to Canadian retailers are among the highest in the wealthy corporations, but when it comes time to support small world, ranging from 1.5% to 4% of the purchase price. In 2012, businesses that create jobs, they say there is no money. retailers paid $832 million in credit card fees. That is a huge amount. Overall, 98% of all Canadian businesses are small and medium- I am confident that Canadians will remember this over the sized businesses with fewer than 100 employees. They are the summer. They are fed up with this government favouring wealthy backbone of our country’s economy. They created 70% of all new families and large corporations. They are tired of having a private sector jobs between 2002 and 2012. In spite of these government that does not listen to them. compelling figures, nothing is being done to help them. As these ● (1825) businesses struggle with increasing expenses and very slim margins, many of them will have to shut down if they do not get the support [English] they need during difficult times. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin): The time provided for The NDP wants to help small and medium-sized businesses, the consideration of private members' business has now expired, and which are Canada's real job creators. We want to invest in innovation the order is dropped to the bottom of the order of precedence on the and the manufacturing sector, which has lost 400,000 jobs since the order paper. Conservatives came to power. The Conservative strategy—letting credit card companies do as they please—is not working. It being 6:30 p.m., the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1). In July 2013, Canada's Competition Tribunal stated that the conditions imposed on Canadian businesses by Visa and MasterCard (The House adjourned at 6:30 p.m.)

CONTENTS

Thursday, April 30, 2015

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS Mr. Simms...... 13275 Mr. Côté ...... 13275 Government Response to Petitions Mr. Lamoureux ...... 13276 Mr. Lukiwski ...... 13261

Interparliamentary Delegations STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Mr. Brown (Leeds—Grenville) ...... 13261 Putting on the Glitz Mr. Preston ...... 13261 Mr. Kamp ...... 13276 Committees of the House Finance Morelle Elementary School in Saint-Ubalde Mr. Caron ...... 13261 Ms. Michaud ...... 13276 Motion for concurrence ...... 13261 Financial Institutions Mr. Lamoureux ...... 13262 Mr. Williamson ...... 13277 Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway) ...... 13263 Herbert H. Carnegie Future Aces Foundation Mr. Allen (Welland) ...... 13263 Ms. Sgro...... 13277 Motion ...... 13265 Motion negatived...... 13266 Richard Desrochers

Mr. Lukiwski ...... 13266 Mr. Gourde ...... 13277 Motion ...... 13266 Officers of the Lake Superior Scottish Regiment and Motion agreed to ...... 13267 Garrison Officers' Mess

Petitions Mr. Rafferty ...... 13277 Dementia 4-H Mr. Julian...... 13267 Mr. Shipley ...... 13277 Motion ...... 13267 Motion negatived...... 13268 Marven McCarthy Mrs. O'Neill Gordon ...... 13278 Questions on the Order Paper Mr. Lukiwski ...... 13268 Chambly Seigneury 350th Anniversary

Mr. Dubé ...... 13278 GOVERNMENT ORDERS Taxation

Anti-terrorism Act, 2015 Mr. Warkentin ...... 13278 Bill C-51—Time Allocation Motion Gatineau Park Mr. Van Loan...... 13268 Mr. Ravignat ...... 13278 Motion ...... 13268 Mr. Garrison ...... 13268 Vietnamese Community Mr. Lamoureux ...... 13269 Mr. Adler ...... 13278 Mrs. Hughes...... 13269 Journey to Freedom Day Mr. Garneau ...... 13270 Mr. Dion...... 13279 Mr. Watson ...... 13270 Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona) ...... 13270 Taxation Ms. Borg ...... 13271 Mr. Shory...... 13279 Ms. May ...... 13271 Liberal Party of Canada Mr. Easter ...... 13272 Mr. Angus ...... 13279 Ms. Sims ...... 13272 Legalization of Marijuana Mr. Blanchette ...... 13272 ...... Mr. Hawn...... 13273 Ms. James 13279 Motion agreed to ...... 13274 ORAL QUESTIONS Citizen Voting Act Bill C-50—Time Allocation Motion Ethics Mr. Van Loan...... 13274 Mr. Julian...... 13279 Motion ...... 13274 Mr. Calandra ...... 13279 Mr. Scott...... 13275 Mr. Julian...... 13280 Ms. Rempel ...... 13275 Mr. Calandra ...... 13280 The Budget Foreign Affairs

Mr. Julian...... 13280 Mrs. Ambler ...... 13285

Mr. Oliver ...... 13280 Mr. Alexander ...... 13285 Manufacturing Industry Tourism

Mrs. Groguhé...... 13280 Mr. Gravelle ...... 13285

Mr. Oliver ...... 13280 Mr. Holder...... 13285 Mrs. Groguhé...... 13280 Aboriginal Affairs Mr. Oliver ...... 13280 Ms. Quach...... 13285 National Defence Mr. MacKay ...... 13285 Ms. Murray ...... 13281 Copyright Mr. Bezan ...... 13281 Mr. Nantel ...... 13286 Ms. Murray ...... 13281 Mrs. Glover ...... 13286 Mr. Bezan ...... 13281 Canada Post Mr. McGuinty ...... 13281 Mr. Kellway ...... 13286 Mr. Bezan ...... 13281 Ms. Raitt...... 13286 Mr. Harris (St. John's East) ...... 13281 Ethics Mr. Bezan ...... 13281 Mr. Easter ...... 13286 Ms. Michaud ...... 13281 Mr. Calandra ...... 13286 Mr. Bezan ...... 13282 Mr. Easter ...... 13286 Consumer Protection Mr. Calandra ...... 13286 Mr. Cash...... 13282 Public Safety Mr. Oliver ...... 13282 Mr. Sandhu ...... 13287 Ms. Papillon ...... 13282 Ms. James ...... 13287 Mr. Oliver ...... 13282 Ms. Sims ...... 13287 Employment Ms. James ...... 13287 Ms. Nash ...... 13282 Taxation Mr. Fast...... 13282 Mr. Richards...... 13287 Ms. Nash ...... 13282 Ms. Bergen ...... 13287 Mr. Fast...... 13282 Employment Ms. Freeman ...... 13283 Mr. Dion...... 13287 Mr. Holder...... 13283 Mr. Poilievre...... 13287 Taxation Nothern Development Mr. Caron ...... 13283 Mr. Bevington ...... 13288 Mr. Oliver ...... 13283 Mr. Nicholson ...... 13288 Mr. Cullen ...... 13283

Mr. Oliver ...... 13283 Foreign Affairs Mr. Toet ...... 13288 The Economy Mr. Nicholson ...... 13288 Mr. Brison ...... 13283 Public Safety Mr. Holder...... 13283 Ms. May ...... 13288 Mr. Brison ...... 13283 Mr. Van Loan...... 13288 Mr. Poilievre...... 13284

Mr. Goodale ...... 13284 Employment

Mr. Poilievre...... 13284 Mr. Fortin...... 13288 Mr. Poilievre...... 13288 Seniors

Ms. Mathyssen ...... 13284 Presence in Gallery

Mr. Poilievre...... 13284 The Acting Speaker (Mr. Stanton) ...... 13289 Ms. Morin (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine) ...... 13284 Business of the House Mr. Poilievre...... 13284 Mr. Julian...... 13289 Food Safety Mr. Van Loan...... 13289 Ms. Liu ...... 13284 Privilege Ms. Ambrose ...... 13284 Physical Obstruction Mr. Allen (Welland) ...... 13285 Mr. Cullen ...... 13290 Ms. Ambrose ...... 13285 Mr. Lukiwski ...... 13292 Ms. May ...... 13292 Motion for concurrence ...... 13299 Ms. Mathyssen ...... 13292 (Motion agreed to) ...... 13299 Mr. Lamoureux ...... 13293 Bill C-46. Third reading ...... 13299 Mr. Christopherson ...... 13293 Mrs. Block ...... 13299 Mr. Bélanger ...... 13293 Ms. Péclet ...... 13301 Mr. Julian...... 13294 Mr. Lamoureux ...... 13302 Mrs. Day ...... 13294 Ms. Brown (Newmarket—Aurora)...... 13302 Mr. Van Loan...... 13294 Mr. Giguère ...... 13302 Mr. Caron ...... 13303 GOVERNMENT ORDERS Citizen Voting Act PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS Bill C-50—Time Allocation Motion Small and Medium-sized Businesses Motion ...... 13295 Mr. Giguère ...... 13304 ...... Ms. May 13295 Motion ...... 13304 ...... Ms. Rempel 13295 Mr. Adler ...... 13306 Mr. Scott...... 13295 Mr. Lamoureux ...... 13306 Mr. Simms...... 13296 Mr. Adler ...... 13306 Motion agreed to ...... 13299 Ms. Sgro...... 13308 Pipeline Safety Act Ms. Sitsabaiesan...... 13309 Bill C-46. Report Stage ...... 13299 Mr. Saxton...... 13310 Mr. Rickford...... 13299 Mrs. Sellah ...... 13312 Published under the authority of the Speaker of Publié en conformité de l’autorité the House of Commons du Président de la Chambre des communes SPEAKER’S PERMISSION PERMISSION DU PRÉSIDENT

Reproduction of the proceedings of the House of Commons Il est permis de reproduire les délibérations de la Chambre et and its Committees, in whole or in part and in any medium, is de ses comités, en tout ou en partie, sur n’importe quel hereby permitted provided that the reproduction is accurate support, pourvu que la reproduction soit exacte et qu’elle ne and is not presented as official. This permission does not soit pas présentée comme version officielle. Il n’est toutefois extend to reproduction, distribution or use for commercial pas permis de reproduire, de distribuer ou d’utiliser les purpose of financial gain. Reproduction or use outside this délibérations à des fins commerciales visant la réalisation d'un permission or without authorization may be treated as profit financier. Toute reproduction ou utilisation non permise copyright infringement in accordance with the Copyright Act. ou non formellement autorisée peut être considérée comme Authorization may be obtained on written application to the une violation du droit d’auteur aux termes de la Loi sur le Office of the Speaker of the House of Commons. droit d’auteur. Une autorisation formelle peut être obtenue sur présentation d’une demande écrite au Bureau du Président de la Chambre. Reproduction in accordance with this permission does not La reproduction conforme à la présente permission ne constitute publication under the authority of the House of constitue pas une publication sous l’autorité de la Chambre. Commons. The absolute privilege that applies to the Le privilège absolu qui s’applique aux délibérations de la proceedings of the House of Commons does not extend to Chambre ne s’étend pas aux reproductions permises. Lors- these permitted reproductions. Where a reproduction includes qu’une reproduction comprend des mémoires présentés à un briefs to a Committee of the House of Commons, authoriza- comité de la Chambre, il peut être nécessaire d’obtenir de tion for reproduction may be required from the authors in leurs auteurs l’autorisation de les reproduire, conformément à accordance with the Copyright Act. la Loi sur le droit d’auteur. Nothing in this permission abrogates or derogates from the La présente permission ne porte pas atteinte aux privilèges, privileges, powers, immunities and rights of the House of pouvoirs, immunités et droits de la Chambre et de ses comités. Commons and its Committees. For greater certainty, this Il est entendu que cette permission ne touche pas l’interdiction permission does not affect the prohibition against impeaching de contester ou de mettre en cause les délibérations de la or questioning the proceedings of the House of Commons in Chambre devant les tribunaux ou autrement. La Chambre courts or otherwise. The House of Commons retains the right conserve le droit et le privilège de déclarer l’utilisateur and privilege to find users in contempt of Parliament if a coupable d’outrage au Parlement lorsque la reproduction ou reproduction or use is not in accordance with this permission. l’utilisation n’est pas conforme à la présente permission.

Also available on the Parliament of Canada Web Site at the Aussi disponible sur le site Web du Parlement du Canada à following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca l’adresse suivante : http://www.parl.gc.ca